Got your attention? Cannabis demands dominate Obama website.
President Elect Obama is known for reaching out beyond the beltway to take the pulse of the nation. His website, Change.gov offers all of us the chance to communicate our hopes, dreams, fears and needs. This is governance from the ground up, the way it was meant to be. A new program just instituted on the website, is one where citizens may pose specific questions, and others can vote on their importance, bringing significant questions to the top of the list.
In the short six-and-a-half hours the “Open for Questions” segment of Obama’s change.gov website actually stayed open, 7300 questions were posted, 10,000 people participated and 600,000 votes were cast for the most important issues on people’s minds. Guess which question had the most votes?
"Will you consider legalizing marijuana so that the government can regulate it, tax it, put age limits on it, and create millions of new jobs and create a billion dollar industry right here in the U.S.?"
Yes, it’s true. With all of the incredible and difficult issues facing us today, the question above was the most prominent in people’s minds. Questions two through six, in order of popularity, read:
"What will you do as President to restore the Constitutional protections that have been subverted by the Bush Administration and how will you ensure that our system of checks and balances is renewed?"
"What will you do to establish transparency and safeguards against waste with the rest of the Wall Street bailout money?"
"Will you lift the ban on Stem Cell research in your first 100 days in office?"
"What will you do to promote science and mathematics education to Elementary and Middle School students?"
"Will you appoint a Special Prosecutor - ideally Patrick Fitzgerald - to independently investigate the gravest crimes of the Bush Administration, including torture and warrantless wiretapping?"
I want you to get this. Constitutional protections, the Wall Street bailout, stem cell research, elementary and middle school education, and the investigation of torture and warrentless wiretapping by the Bush Administration played second fiddle to a demand for a change in marijuana laws. Not only that, the seventh of the top ten questions reads as follows:
"13 states have compassionate use programs for medial Marijuana, yet the federal gov't continues to prosecute sick and dying people. Isn't it time for the federal gov't to step out of the way and let doctors and families decide what is appropriate?"
trumping questions about our farming policies, use of mercenaries in our military, and “greening’ the environment.
Then there’s this one, just missing the top 10 by one slot:
"The US "War on Drugs" wastes billions every year tracking down and incarcerating non-violent users. What is your position on the legalization of marijuana? How do you feel about treating rather than imprisoning users of harder, addictive drugs?"
Question 12 was one about universal health care. Here is Question 13:
"How will you fix the current war on drugs in America? and will there be any chance of decriminalizing marijuana?"
Question 14 asks the president to preserve Net Neutrality. Here’s question 15:
"What kind of progress can be expected on the decriminalization and legalization for medicinal purposes of marijuana and will you re-prioritize the "War On Drugs" to reflect the need for drug treatment instead of incarceration?"
Questions 16 and 17 reflect demands for solar energy investment, and banking accountability, and 18 reads as follows (followed by demands to sever the relationship between the FDA and big pharma, and asking for more investment in high-speed passenger rails.
"The U.S. has the world's highest incarceration rate, largely due to the War on Drugs. Our prisons are festering pits of rape, racism, and gang violence, and divert a lot of tax money to the corrupt prison industry. How can we fix this?"
So, here’s a quick tally. Two of the top ten, and six of the top twenty questions addressed our government’s policies surrounding cannabis (recreational and medicinal) and the War on Drugs in general.
It doesn’t end there. Following question 21 about tax incentives to home owners for installing energy efficiency measures we have:
"Would you consider the legalizing of growing hemp (not marijuana) for food, clothing and bio-fuel use?"
and
"Drug control policy in America is a mess, most specifically with regards to marijuana. Federal and state laws are in conflict all over the country. What do you plan to do about this? Will you allow the states to make their own determinations?"
After that folks asked about public transportation, gay marriage, sustainable farming practices, and abuse of executive power. Then we get to questions 28 and 29,
"What about the use of Hemp and finally legalizing marijuana for personal use?"
"If we did not have over 2 million people in jail, many of which on marijuana charges, we would save billions a year and keep families together. Will you commit to a comprehensive drug treatment plan that will help keep families together?"
These two queries just edged out a request to prevent bailout recipients from using the money for lobbying.
Apparently, the arrest of nearly 1,000,000 otherwise law abiding citizens each year for mere possession of cannabis, the relentless persecution of the sick and dying, and the continued incarceration of 1 out of every 100 adults, (and the imprisonment, jailing, probation or parole of 1 out of every 31 adults) is finally getting on peoples nerves,
Yes, these questions will not go away. I’m afraid lawmakers around the country will have to suck it up and realize that, as Barney Frank put it: this is an issue where the public is way ahead of the politicians.
To see all 7,300 questions in order of their importance to the populace, click here.
P.S.
I kind of like questions 33 and 34
"What will you do to ensure that the government takes scientific research into account when making laws? Especially when it comes to questions about the legalization of marijuana and the use of medical marijuana."
"On the campaign trail, you said you would put an end to the federal raids on medical marijuana patients. Will you implement this policy within the first year of your term?"
Get my point? Are you listening?
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Will Someone Feed The Cat?
Sunil Aggarwal
Anne Cameron Cutri
Dr. Susanne Freeborn
Writing Raven
O'Really?
Salon.com
Comments
This sounds like a pent up demand for 8 years of NO ONE answering.
Now we get people like the Nobel Prize winner appointed to answer the questions.
I like this system of asking us first---BEFORE we get fed answers.
Great post!
I hope so to all the above.
"Prohibition makes you want to cry into your beer
but denies you the beer to cry into."
We all know we are going down, we may as well go happy...
Great post, Brinna!
This is great, Brinna. Thanks for reporting it. I believe it's cause for great optimism about what lies beyond the dark days ahead.
Yes, Lonnie, I am optimistic. . . and sleeping a lot better, too.
Question #1 sounds like a great idea on many levels to solve various problems facing the country.
Damn right! This smoky suggestion means a breath of fresh air. As Al Loomis notes, discourse among the people is what will right the Republic.
So damn cool.
Brinna, thanks for bringing this to us!
Merry Christmas to you!
(Jeeves, turn on Sponge Bob, please! I can't find the remote!)
Joan, the monetary cost of the War of on Drugs is in the billions, the human cost is incalculable.
gmgaston, legalizing cannabis has an inexpensive and effective medicine would do a lot to reduce our health care costs -- can you imagine, growing your own mild pain killers, sleeping pills, relaxants, all with virtually no side-effects, and which are impossible to overdose on. Then there is hemp and its ability to contain erosion, to restore soils, to sequester carbon, to produce fiber, plastics, building materials, bio-fuel, food.
Man Talk Now, LOL!
Dick, I just heard the statistic on NPR this morning: as of 2007 31 out of every 100 adults has been arrested or is on probation. That is completely unacceptable, and must be changed.
Rance, I rated your post on Afghanistan. The pained poetry of it is really quite wonderful. You should definitely post more!
Regards
RH
Seriously, our prisons are plugged up with this which feeds an industry that would be better put to building schools.
Yes, O'stephanie, the prison industry is blog material onto itself. Add the prison guard union to breweries, and infra-red equipment manufacturers which provide continual funding to the War on Drugs.
If I had to guess President Obama will concentrate first in things that he can do within the executive branch through direct orders, regulations and regulation change and through allocation of appropriated funds. I know that these sound esoteric, but he has a lot of arrows in his quiver without going where he will not want to take this issue: to the Congress for new legislation, which would likely fail miserably and get the neandertals all worked up.
So let's hope he has the guts to do what he can do within the executive, and through continued outreach like on change.org.
Two other things: someone above mentioned the demography of those on the internet as being skewed towards those who favor legalization. I think that is right and should not be overlooked. What has to be done is to determine if a majority of all citizens support it. Maybe they will now, but polls in the past have not shown that, have they?
Second, did anybody bring up the non incarceration issues of seizing property: houses, cars, everything in these searches? That practice is so grossly unfair and often is the main way that local law enforcement enhances its coffers.
Very good, Brinna!
Monte
(rated)
As to the internet bias, while that may certainly be true, what is also true is that in national polls, 75% or more of the general population support the legalization of medical marijuana. Indeed, an AARP poll all the way back in 2004 showed 72% approval. And AARP members, of course, are not exactly "your internet crowd,"
Roll me a Camberwell Carrot!
Yes, they are in the same family but they are not the same plant. It's like comparing a poppy seed muffin and heroin. Sure both come from poppies, but one will get you high the other goes good with coffee. Industrial hemp will not get you high. Sure if you smoke a pound you will get high from the smoke inhalation, but not from the THC.
The main reason commercial hemp has been blocked in this country is because the DEA and the Agra and paper industry. The DEA reasons (or lack of reason) since the plants look similar to marijuana, pot growers will hide their pot in hemp fields. Canada and China have become major IP growers without a increase in marijuana production.
IP does not require fertilizer or pesticides. On the other hand cotton requires both and cotton production represents 60% of all the pesticide use in this country. Hence another reason the growing of CH is blocked, billion in loss for the Agra businesses who produce all those pesticides. Hemp also has 9 times the tensile strength of cotton so clothing will not wear out as fast. So hemp will hurt the garment industry. Hemp (which was used in 90% of the paper making before the turn of the century) could replace a lot of tree cutting, which would hurt the timber industry. One acre of hemp will produce the same amount of fiber as 4 acres of woods. Plus, hemp is renewable and will produce each year not every 20-30 years like timber.
IP seeds are rich in oil. Hemp oil is a complete food with omega fatty acids and protein. The oil in hemp contains all the omega groups of olive oil, corn, and fish oil. The oil can be used for bio fuel. Since it is cheap to grow and does not harm the environment. Hemp bio fuel is a renewable resource.
So here is it. The DEA makes billions burning hemp plants and calling it marijuana. The Agra, cotton, and clothing industry makes billions from cotton. The oil industry makes billions keeping this country dependent on foreign oil. The timber industry makes billions for paper fiber.
Who looses the consumer, family farms, and the environment.
But, to many people still confuse hemp with marijuana. To many times those who favor legalization for marijuana confuse hemp with marijuana. George Washington did not grow pot, he and most of the other farmers grew hemp. They did not smoke it they used the fibers for rope, fabric, and paper and the seeds for livestock.
They are two separate plants and two separate issues.
Provide income to destitutes in Afghanistan and Columbia and Appalachia and other calamity zones- who are otherwise busy making bad drugs.
Import and tax- put the Mafia and the Farc and the Taliban and the Crystal Meth Barons out of business. Make THC consumers happy.
Unclog the courts and prisons. Relieve chemo patients and others who need the antidepressant effect of the great herb. Resore our own freedom.
WIN_WIN_WIN_WIN situation, right?
Some of you will no doubt disparage these benefits. But there actually ARE good reasons for an end to the prohibition.
That damned Anslinger! That damned Harrison Tax Act!
Penrose, you are so right. People have their money, property and children! taken away for using what is probably one of the most, if not the most beneficial herb on the planet..
Padraig, if I knew what a Camberwell Carrot was, I would definitely roll you one.
******
Lisa, I understand your mystification but consider this:
20-30 percent of the US population uses cannabis. 100's of thousands use it medicinally, and to many, having access to it is a matter of life and death. The war on drugs imprisons millions. There have just been 5000 deaths reported in Mexico because of US demand for a substance which is illegal for no other reason than corporate interests. If it was legalized those deaths would stop.
The War on Drugs is the main mechanism that the establishment controls the masses. You may think this is about people "wanting to get high" but I assure you, that is the least of it.
Cannabis halts cancer for crying out loud. Why don't we know that? Because the information is continually buried, ignored, or laughed off.
Yes, it is a much more important issue than most of us would suspect.
******
M Todd, Thanks for your detailed contribution to this issue. I appreciated it!
pacepace, your points are well taken. Thank you.
This muck-up may have come about because I've been messed with.
You see, since DEC. OF 2000, I've been screwed over very badly by The Fed - especially after two innocent people were Murdered in the process of their supposedly setting out saving me from drugs; and it may be that my efforts to make these Facts known has set off this campagn of letter wrting and voting in motion!!!
You see, the Fed - and some Local Racists Scumbags (White AND 'Not White' Ones), who are Policepersons or in 'The 12-step Community - let a group of 'not-friends' of mine (people who I FIRED, for example) get involved in helping them to 'save me from my drug abuse'; though this 'abuse' - this 'crime' - is really just 30+ years of PROUD Medicinal Herb usage; and - since as at least some of these Killers were actually K.K.K., National Alliance, or Aryan Brotherhood Affiliates - who were really just 'out to get me' for betraying The Klan - they took the opportunity to Kill Two People, AND ME TOO.
And I'd bet that John Ashcroft KNEW ALL ABOUT IT!!!
This is why the Murder Victims were a Jewess GalPal of mine and a Mentally Retarded Black Girl who - though I'd never met her - I was accused of murdering to "Protect my Drug Dealing Interests".
The fact that the only Real Killer to have been arrested so far, is the Son of an L.A. Police Officer, is also very revealing!!!
And it just goes on and on; for even though I've informed the Authorities, with the L.A.P.D. and People who I suspect to a buch of 'W's Texan White Supremacists Cronies out to protect their own (not to mention the Admin from another Scandal), I have - of course - gotten nowhere.
The OUTRAGE that all of this has stirred up in our community (Portland, OR.), as they've learned of how Blatantly my Rights - as a Physically Disabled Person - have been Violated; of how I'm being tortured (by "The You Know Whos") day and night, to 'punnish me' for 'faking a Mental Illness' - while they deliberately ignore my Chronic Pain; of how my Medical, Legal, and S.S.A. Records have all been tampered with; of how even my Safe Deposit Box - and the Papers in it (which incriminate the Fed, you see) have not been 'secure', like the Constitution Guarantees; and much much more has - perhaps - served as a motivation for the Forces of Light (Up The 420, that is).
By the way, we who are Medical Cannabis Users hate the words 'Pot', 'Dope', and - especially - the 'M' word; as they are all relics of 'The Age Of Lying About Pot In Order To Make It - And The People Who Like It - Look Bad'; and - in the 'M'-words case - of the Corporate Propaganda Campagn that got it made Illegal with the 1937 Tax Stamp Act.
You see, W.R. Hurst COINED the word Marijuana because it sounded 'Mexican-y'; as he (Wood-pulp Newsprint), and DuPont (Nylon), and Rockefeller (Petro-Diesel) wanted racism to play a role in helping them to destroy the Hemp Paper, Hemp Rope, and Hemp Seed Bio-Diesel Fuel Markets, even though this 1930's move - which, amongst other bad things, led to vast swaths of Virgin Forest being turned into a Hurst Publication Newspaper, and then THROWN OUT THE NEXT DAY - was and is at the heart of our Enviro Problems.
Another Issue that may have inspired these responses, is that - when he was campagning in Oregon - Obama promised US Patients that Science and Compassion would guide Medical Marijuana Policy in his Admin..
The Fact that my willingness to 'stand up and be counted', vis-a-vis the Medical Marijuana Issue, got me set up and shot down - as well as causing the deaths of two innocents, because the Cops (The FBI!) used Bad Guys - who then Killed People - as 'tools' to Fuck With Me, should evoke Obamas' - and your own - Compassion, as well as a strong desire to set people like me free from these kinds of Law Enforcement abuses - before they turn deadly, again.
After all; if the Fact that I got screwed with in the above manner, AFTER I quit Oxycontin and Methadone - voluntarily (take that, 'It's a Gateway to Abuse' LIARS) - and switched to Medical Marijuana, doesn't PISS YOU OFF; then it SHOULD!
I just hope that Obama will FORCE a Proper Investigation of the Portland FBI Station - and several out of state Law Enforcement Agents/Agencies; for even though they've been trying to make me look like a scumbag - and themselves look like good law enforcers; both they and I know taht they've wronged me - and gotten two people killed in the process.
Naturally, they're none to inclined to admit it; though I did write to the FBIs' Internal Affairs Dept. in which I accused "White Supremacists in The Current Admin." of "Abusing The Patriot Act" to take revenge on Anti-KKK Activists; and - three days later - John Ashcroft RESIGNED!!!
Still, I've been left wondering many things, like: was my last Lover really only 16? Is she really a Secret Service Agents DAUGHTER? Did a 'W'/Ashcroft/KKK Alliance really form up to fuck with me by taking advantage of my 'Federal Vulnerability' as a Medicinal Cannabis User and an SSD Recipient and/or by sending a aMinor to Fuck Me?
I think that the answer is YES! After all, would the KKK pass up a chance to fuck with a white boy who they hate as much as they hate me? You see; it was the ATK (AUSTIN TEXAS KLAN), no less, who I pissed off; and I KNOW that they've taken many swipes at me since 1982 - including trying to rip off my Grandfather in 1984.
Pray, if your religous, that we not only get a Proper Federal Medical Marijuana Act out of all of this - but also that I get to NAIL THESE BASTARDS!!!
If you want to read about more of the Outrageous that The Fed has done to me, for using Cannabis as a Medicine; which I only did because I'm a Fiscal Conserbative - and I Wanted To Work, rather than to live on SSI for free, despite my having TWO Legally Disabling Medical Conditions; then go to my JimRinX O.S. Blogspace.
There's one item in the Previous Comments segment that will you educate you further and, hopefully, get you fired up to fix things as well. Though I haven't yet posted the Item that I've entittled "The Evil Option" (Methadone instead of Cannabis); when I do, it will be a must read for all those concerned about the Disabled, Health Care Costs, etc..
After all; if the Fed had it's way completely (I've got them in a head lock, so I get some things 'my way') I'd be taking $3000/mth. worth the Poisonous Pills!!! At YOUR Expense!!!
Write Those Blogs! Vote Those Issues! Go Team, GO!!!
Wow. JinRin. Sorry you had to go through all of that. This so called War on Drugs is a War on Us, and the sooner we all realize it, the better. (Isn't it astounding that people can say with a straight face: it's better for you to use prescribed, extremely expensive, highly addictive, liver devastating substances to deal with pain, rather than a simple herb with little to no side effects accept for what is termed “mild euphoria.”)
Of course, the population most concerned is those targeted by the laws against marijuana use, possession and home cultivation- who at any given moment number in the tens of millions.
If that's a "lobby", it's a civil rights lobby, fed up with years of not emrely discrimination, but outright legal persecution.
As for the idea that's been put forth in various times and places by Drug Warrior spokespeople like Barry McCaffrey and John Walters, that there's a "legalization lobby" that seeks to profit from selling legalized drugs- I recall a conversation I had a few years back with someone who grew marijuana in California: a real criminal roughneck who had done prison time and who wasn't particularly deterred by the prospect of going back. I mentioned that I thought that growing small quantities of pot ought to be legal, and he stared at me as if I was out to strangle his prize pet golden-egg laying goose.
You won't find the gangsters cheering for legalized marijuana. The present state of affairs gives them exactly the exaggerated power, status, and windfall profits they're after.
Personally, I don't support the idea of a commercial market for legalized marijuana. I simply think that if adults want to grow small amounts for themselves and their friends, and give away small amounts to other adults, they should be able to. (If they grow more and try to sell it, I think they ought to have their crop confiscated, and face legal penalties. )
Some will get into the hands of kids. But that's a minimal concern, compared to what's already happening with Oxycontin/Vicodin/Percocet. Or with alcohol, which is also much more potentially dangerous.
At least that way the kids won't be invlolved in a huge, ugly business of dealing it for profit, the way it is now. The retail market for illegal drugs begins in the high schools, with pot. It's been that way for nigh on 40 years. Beginning in the teenage years, the kids who are the ones most successful as drug dealers will always be the ones most willing to employ violence, intimidation, and other criminal tactics. Like it or not, they're often the role models. Given their choice between being Scarface/Superfly vs. being John Ashcroft/Dan Lundgren, most teenage American boys- and girls- prefer the first option.
It's a false choice. But in a lot more high schools than you might think- including high-priced private schools- the status quo of the Zero Tolerance War On Drugs pretty much demands that kids choose up on one side or the other. All of the cornball Soviet-style social engineering public relations programs to "make drugs uncool" back in the 1980s came to a pretty sad ending. The one-time flag carrier of the "antidrug" culture war in the Reagan years, , Michael Jackson, is a recluse in Dubai, strung out on opiate pharmaceuticals.
It's tragic, really. The War On Drugs made smoking pot vastly more important than it actually is. They made a Federal Case out of it.
The other factor is the value of hemp, as a crop that has nothing to do with people using it to alter their minds. For instance, hemp uses so much less irrigation water than cotton that I'm incredulous that it hasn't largely replaced it as a fiber crop. But the law gets in the way...that's so bad, so irrational, that it actually makes non-drug users look stupid. Really, really stupid.
Read more in my blog
Romancing the Stoned
That said, I'm glad the topic is getting some attention.
My guess is that if Obama wants to change the current screwed-up drug policies, he's going to have to do it carefully, piecemeal, and mostly behind-the-scenes.
That actually goes for many of the things about this country that really need changed. Even if he wants to change them, a direct approach would slam into a wall. Judging from his campaign, though, he's *good* at political ju-jitsu. So the question is what changes *he* wants, and if he thinks there's sufficient public support for those various changes to apply pressure when and where pressure will need to be supplied.
Possible/probable outcomes: regulatory structures put in place would dictate a big business corporate monopoly of licensed suppliers; the FDA would regulate the potency and variety using overly simplistic standards; insurance companies would seek huge rate hikes, based on the "unknown hazards" of the substance being regulated; the government would become reliant on yet another "sin tax" for revenue, leading it to both encourage a sustained population of users and/or continually hiking the tax on the substance; taxation and regulation would dictate that prices remain high, encouraging a continuation of a "bootlegging" criminal black market; personal cultivation would remain illegalized as "unsafe" and "uninspected"- although the real issue would be that private cultivation would cut into tax revenues; due to the ease of cultivation, a parallel untaxed black market would survive without difficulty;
with the eventual outcome that the entire experiment of "legalization" would be deemed a failure, returning to the status quo.
But all that is assuming that a legalization effort would survive the political chicanery and posturing, as every legalese objection would get raised. Simple decrim and allowance for home cultivation is a much more modest and achievable goal.
Ironically, doing so would simply bring the legal status quo of cannabis up to the level decreed by Alcohol Prohibition- which not only kept simple possession of alcohol "decriminalized", but also allowed home possession of up to 200 gallons of fruit juices (fermentable, of course) for personal needs; and also made provision for alcohol-based "medicinal tonics."
The War On Drugs is so much worse than Alcohol Prohibition was, that it isn't even funny.
Simply legalize possession of small amounts of cannabis, and allow home cultivation. It's basically a nontoxic plant- unlike tobacco- or hydrangea- even if small children chew on the flowering tops, it won't do them serious harm. The economy will get a positive effect- not from increased revenue to the government, but more directly- by people no longer having to pay $10-$25 dollars for a gram of cannabis bud; that will instead be money that they can spend at the market, or even save in a bank. And law enforcement priorities will go elsewhere- to things like actually solving crimes (recalling when my car was broken into some years back, and I called the police- only to get a voice mail message line, asking me where THEY can reach ME, at some unspecified time over the next day or so.)
Say, does anyone know what happened to Barney Frank's legislation to make the personal use of a little cannabis legal?
If marijuana was legal to grow, the street value would drop to zero. Say the law was changed to allow growing 200 grams (about 7 oz.) per year for personal use. That would be 2 or 3 plants which would grow in a space less than 4X4 feet in a few flower pots. So the idea that marijuana would be a taxable commodity like alcohol is unrealistic.
What the federal and state government would gain is billions in cut cost enforcing the current marijuana laws. If you take marijuana off the table you are left with about 2 million coke, heroin, meth, and other drug users. That would mean that law enforcement could concentrate on the real drug problem in this country. A net benefit.
Also, the crime associated with trafficking marijuana would be gone. It is not the drug, it is the billions of dollars of cash that attracts the criminal and violence. Again a net gain for society.
Who would loose? The alcohol, drug rehab, pharmaceutical industries for profit prison system and local law enforcement would loose billions. They have been and will continue to be the force stopping the legalization of marijuana. That is who will have to be silenced, because in my experience, if you mess with someones bread and butter they can moralize all the reasons to not let something happen.
Wayne, your blog Romancing the Stoned is excellent. I recommend that everyone read it.
Bearpaw, I agree with you take on the ju-jitsu of effective politics, but as for the reaction of the general populace, while Obama supporters do tend to be activists, they are activists across the board. Remember that AARP poll I mentioned. Not exactly a bastion of radicalism. I do believe folks in general are fed up, and can see through the smoke and mirrors. The time has come for a change, and just about everyone knows it. I do. You do. Lets make it happen.
Ellen, so far there has not been any response from the Obama campaign, but on their website they say they will respond to some of the most popular questions. Believe me, I am awaiting it with bated breath. As for that dear soul, Congressman Frank, he need more support in congress. Write to your representatives. Tell them you are ready for a change in our drug policies. Tell them to support Frank's bill, and the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment which would protect medical cannabis users from arrest.
And I would add, all of you, I am so touched that you took the time to comment on this issue. Thank you.
I need to note that the support for simple decriminalization of possession and small-quantity home cultivation is a policy recommendation that goes back as far as the Shafer Commission, a blue-ribbon panel appointed during the Nixon administration to study the marijuana situation in the USA c.1972; and repeated by the National Academy of Sciences panel who studied the issue and issued their findings in a report in 1982, during the Reagan administration.
Both of these reports were summarily dismissed in their time. I sometimes wonder how much would have been different in this country if the recommendations had simply been heeded, before the advent of streetcorner drive-up illegal drug retail markets as a coast-to-coast institution in the 1980s.
As to your remarks on the American populace having altered their views on cannabis and the Drug War to support drug reform measures- I should note that not very long ago, I heard an on-line call-in show on C-Span, featuring one of the assistants of "Drug Czar" John Walters. Every last call taken was in favor of decriminalization. It was like 14-0. And (although I doubt this would hold up as court testimony) from listening to the voices it was plain that almost all of the people speaking out were white folks, middle aged and older, from all regions of the country. Some had horrible stories to tell about the fate of some of their relatives at the hands of legal persecution.
I mention this chiefly because the Drug War is so commonly identified as strictly a "black issue", due to the fact that black people have faced a disproportionate amount of the legal brunt of the War on Drugs. But the practical effect in terms of media reportage is to "ghettoize" the issue, and implicitly reduce it to a case of special pleading by "race hustlers." Notice how many of the media debates on the Drug War thus far all seem to come back to the disparities in crack vs. cocaine sentencing- a reform which, while welcome, amounts to little more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, in the larger context of the status quo.
Unfortunately, time and again the American system in these times has revealed massive disconnects between public sentiment and political will. And it doesn't help that so many national-level politicians are accustomed to living in a bubble of privilege, never getting off the red carpet. They seem to think that this gives them special entitlement to pontificate morally, while never feeling the burdens that they heap on others.
Notwithstanding the ongoing injustice, I don't expect President Obama to kick off his adminstration with a call for reform of the drug laws. He would simply be playing into the hands of partisan demagogues in the opposition. My hope is that over the next 2-4 years, he'll be successful enough at tackling the formidable array of challenges that he's bound to inherit that he'll build the approval and political capital required to confront the Drug War fiasco squarely (rather than simply posturing, by nibbling around the edges.) I think he'll probably have to undergo the quasi-referendum of midterm elections before addressing the issue- at minimum. But In my view, he does need to put serious drug reform as an active part of his agenda before he leaves office. (Why Bill Clinton didn't do it as a popular second-term president, I can't fathom. )
And there's every reason to keep on pressing the matter, even in the absence of it being a priority on his agenda. Perhaps a good first step would be to broach the idea of drug reform candidates for the post of "drug czar" (it would help if the media would stop repeating that inane Gilbert & Sullivan-meets-the-Marquis de Sade label, imo.) I think Joseph MacNamara and Nicholas Pastore are still around.
Reed, once again I am thoroughly impressed with your grasp of the issue.
This is an subject that has been hidden in the dark for way too long. So many people are hungry to learn about it and to express their views. Yesterday, I posted a slightly edited version of this story to NowPublic and it has already gotten over 47,000 views. I am kind of amazed.
keep up the good work.
joe
Presenting the idea that legalization of marijuana will produce tax revenue when in reality it will not makes the whole issue unrealistic. Create a false positive benefit only gives the critics ammunition.
Also, those wishing to change the laws, must see and address the main forces behind the prohibition of marijuana. There are several large and powerful groups within industry and government that have a billion dollar stake in keeping marijuana illegal. Add to this those who believe in total prohibition and want to see everything illegal including alcohol and tobacco. These two groups have been very effective in keeping the average American afraid and allowing the current drug war mentality.
There is a strong case to be made for decriminalization of marijuana and moving it away from the real narcotics like meth, coke, and heroin. Because marijuana is linked in the minds of the average American with all drugs. National decriminalization moves marijuana closer to the category of alcohol which is the acceptable drug of this country and away from coke, heroin and meth. There is also a strong case for medical marijuana which more and more are seeing as a viable and reasonable option. These should be the focus because those are the strongest positions that are winnable.
But, truth should never be a buzz kill.
Marijuana is classified as a Class I drug along with heroin. Cocaine and Chrystal Meth are both Class II drugs! Class I drugs cannot be medically researched (at least not with government funding).
Almost three-quarters of those incarcerated on a federal level are there for offenses related to the consumption of marijuana, not for selling it. Those arrested for drug offenses on a federal level cannot have their sentences commuted, but must serve the entire sentence. Violent criminals can have their sentences commuted, and more and more often are having them commuted to make room for more drug offenders.
The same people who make the laws and refuse to listen to anyone wanting to decriminalize marijuana many times also have a vested interest in some of the private prisons popping up all over the place. So, the main reason marijuana has not been decriminalized is because too much money is being made on it being illegal.
Alcohol and pharmaceuticals kill way more people that all the street drugs combined. Marijuana has never been documented to have killed ANYONE.
Now they're using Homeland Security for drug offenses and Blackwater was just granted a billions of dollars contract to help with drug enforcement.
This needs to stop now. Many problems would be solved by decriminalizing marijuana, and I don't just mean for medical use. I have earned the right to use marijuana recreationally if I so please!
First of all, there is absolutely NOTHING in Obama's past to suggest that he "reaches outside the Beltway." I love how you guys make shit up about this man and project your own sentimental soup all over him! Boy, are you in for a rude awakening. But that's another post.
Did you really think this website was going to be used for "what government is all about?" lol Nope. It was used by stoners and other lefties with unrealistic expectations and ideas about what government is supposed to be all about.
Government isn't your new best friend with a bag of weed to share from time-to-time. It's a bloated bureaucracy that can barely move under its own weight. It will NOT be transformed into light, dainty fairly wings because Barack Obama got himself elected.
This is why no one takes anyone under the age of 30 seriously. And neither will Barack Obama.
Wow were to start. Time will tell if Obama will reach out beyond the beltway. He is pretty much an untested commodity. I myself am over 30 (way over 30) and I listen to young people all the time.
As for the issue at hand, I am either a stoner or a lefty or righty. And I do think the government is out of control with spending on all its little wars, including the war on drugs.
As to the issue at hand, I believe as well as many that our country has used the so call war on drugs to increase governmental control and reduce constitutional freedoms. If the objective is to reduce drug dependency and its negative effect on society they I would have to give the current war on drugs a failing grade. Billions are spent, violent crime associated with the drug trade is up, and basically hundreds of thousands of "users" not dealers are in jail costing billions of dollars.
When you look at countries like Holland, you see a decriminalization of marijuana. It is regulated and the results are less drug use per capital for all drugs including marijuana (a good thing) lower usage among the young (a good thing) and lower crime a really good thing. Holland's major cities do not drug areas, drug addicts on the street and the high crime associated with these areas. The united states does.
Are there some who abuse marijuana? Yes there are just like alcohol. But, not all users are abusers. Alcohol which is the drug of choice in this country has a very negative effect on the society. But it is a drug this society wants and it's prohibition created organized crime. Today marijuana is becoming another drug of choice and just like prohibition of alcohol has created a new cash cow for organized crime.
If you take marijuana off the table what is left is about 2 million drug users of heroin, meth, coke and other far more negative drugs. Again not all those users are abusers, but even if that was the case, if the law enforcement efforts were refocused on the trafficking of these drugs I believe we would see a real impact on the negative effects.
The rhetoric of the past 30 years has gotten us no where, I hope Obama has the courage to take the discussion in another direction. Time will tell. Because the current policies which have cost close to a trillion dollars has done nothing but fill our prisons with users not the violent criminals the tough on drugs policy is supposed to stop.
"Will you committ to an immediate DOJ review of all non-violent men and women in jail and/or prison for minor drug use (i.e. not dealers/etc), and where appropriate, pardon them and divert them to treatment centers?"
Coloradoblue, Denver
"Are you going to realese non-violent drug offenders from prison and stop the sentencing on present defendants of similiar federal cases?"
ginap, illinois
*******
And much appreciation, M Todd, up until this point I never really got the difference between decriminalization and legalization, but thanks to your comments I now understand that the distinction is around the issue of commercialization. At least I think that's what you meant.
********
Oligarchy, do you have a source for your Blackwater/DEA contractual connection. I would REALLY like to follow up on that one.
*********
Rose, I have already participated in an Obama outreach program around service. While it is understandable that after 8 years of Bush II, and the legacy of an additional 12 years of Reagan and Bush I, you are cynical about the Government, I believe you will be pleasantly surprised by this incoming administration.
They also take a different view with addiction. In Holland they only have one type of addition. It does not matter if it is drugs or alcohol the problem is the abuse of, not the substance itself.
To the prohibitionist all drug or alcohol use is abuse. This is the prohibitionist mindset. To the prohibitionist they make no distinction between someone having a drink before dinner and fall down drunk. The same is true with marijuana.
Another distinction between alcohol and marijuana is degrees of intoxication. You can have a few drinks and relax or elevate your mood without the intent of getting inebriated which in most social settings is the acceptable use. No one likes to be around a drunk.
With marijuana it is a little different since the goal for many smoker is total inebriation. But even then there are degrees from a buzz to zoning out. In the case of the media marijuana use is often portrayed as the classic stonier "hey man Dave is not here" to something akin to tripping on acid. It is this negative portrayal of marijuana use that is ingrained in our culture.
Also, the majority of people have never smoked marijuana and can only associate it with being drunk. The reality is like alcohol most users tend to smoke a little to enhance their social activities and maintain control of their wits. But, it is this perception tied that prevails within this society.
I and every lazy person I know buys agra products (and pays taxes on them) every day. They're called food.
The fact that I can grow broccoli myself has not prevented me from swinging by the grocery for some every now and then.
Moreover home brewing of beer is not that hard and hella cheaper than buying it by the case.
Still, cases of beer continue to be sold.
I am sure that many people would pay for legal pot, plus a decent tax if it were available.
Unlike making beer or wine. Growing pot does not take much skill. And, would you grow your own food if broccoli was 200 a stalk or lettuce was 50 dollars a head?
That raises an interesting question what the retail price would be if marijuana was legal. Of course the federal, state, local, county would want their cut so after all the taxes legal pot may be just as much as illegal. And if the government restricted anyone from growing their own, they could keep the price high.
The violence has been attributed to competing drug cartels laying claim to the lucrative drug routes from Mexico into the United States. At the end of the story the Under Sheriff of San Diego County said that Americans need to be aware of the bloodshed that our illegal drug habits are causing.
To this I say bullshit. If you were to decriminalize drugs you would then take away the incentive for violent criminals to import them. Instantly no more drug cartels.
In my view it is antiquated American drug laws that are responsible for the deaths in Mexico and on the streets of American cities as well.
I realize that your posts' intent was to point out how trivial and shallow are some of the people logging in to the Obama website. But perhaps they're not as trivial or as shallow as they seems.
rated
Legalization of marijuana would not end drug trafficking. But, if you take marijuana off the table, that accounts for 90% of the illegal trade in drugs. That would mean 90% of the market would disappear along with the money. That would also mean the DEA and government could focus on the heroin, coke and meth trade.
Holly: It's time, it seems, for everyone to come out of the closet.
Welcome Holly to the discussion. I too, believe it will eventually be legalized, particularly when the forces that are holding prohibition in place are brought to light and clearly understood (an topic I also addressed in the new post.
Neil and M Todd, you both always contribute so much. Thank you.
This is unappealing to the government because it would be hard to tax. It is unappealing to the alcohol industry because it will hurt sales and profits. And it is unappealing to parents trying to prevent their children from doing drugs.
I think a system of paying for growing permit with restrictions of how much and where marijuana can be grown would be a solution for the government. And strict rules of giving or providing marijuana to youth would have to be implemented to protect parents.
As for he alcohol industry, they will do everything they can to stop any home growing because it will reduce their profits. Even if 10% of the now alcohol drinkers switch to marijuana as their recreational drug, it will mean billions in lost sales.
For example the state or country could issue growing permits for say 200 dollars per year which is far less than the cost of an ounce of marijuana. That would equal revenues from tax on alcohol and tobacco per person and would be collected once a year.
The restrictions would be growers would be limited to a certain amount of plants at a time. Growers could be limited to growing inside only, to insure under age would not have access to their crop and strict penalties for those grow without a permit or give or sell marijuana to minors.
It could be sold just like alcohol, but there is no way people would pay the current street price especially since it can be grown so cheaply. I would estimate a legal retail price that would be marketable would be 1-2 dollars per half gram. People would be willing to pay for convenience, but not if it cost hundreds of dollars.
I would imagine the majority of marijuana users would grow their own. Even a cost of 200 dollars per year would pale in comparison to the illegal street price for marijuana.