WebProNews

Tag: Marijuana legalization

  • Marijuana Legalization Was Facebook’s Most-Discussed Topic on Election Day

    On Election Day, with hotly contested House, Senate, and Gubernatorial races happening all over the country, social media chatter was turned up to 11. According to Facebook, Tuesday’s midterm elections saw 85 million interactions (posts, likes, and comments) from 27 million people. Some of that conversation can be attributed to Facebook’s “I’m a Voter” prompt that had people sharing their voting status with their friends – but even with that, the amount of organic discussion is impressive.

    Facebook says that some of the most talked-about topics of the day were taxes, Obamacare, education, and voter fraud – all of which make sense considering that they were made integral parts of various campaigns (especially the first two).

    But in terms of top conversations, the aforementioned topics are numbers two through five. The big winner of the day, in terms of total buzz, was pot.

    Facebook says that marijuana was the most talked-about topic throughout the entirety of Election Day.

    Pot was indeed on the ballot – and in a big way. Statewide ballot measures in four areas – Alaska, Florida, Oregon, and Washington DC – dominated the conversation all day.

    Proponent of marijuana legalization had a pretty solid day, scoring victories in three of the four major battles.

    In Alaska Ballot Measure 2, an initiative to legalize and regulate marijuana for those 21 and older passed with 52 percent of the vote. In Oregon Measure 91, a similar measure, won big – 55 percent to 45 percent.

    Post by Marijuana Policy Project.

    And in our nation’s capital a legalization initiative sponsored by the DC Cannabis Campaign won huge, with a final tally of 65 percent to 28 percent in favor.

    “The people of the District of Columbia have voted in favor of ending racially biased marijuana prohibition,” said Dr. Malik Burnett, the Vice Chair of the DC Cannabis Campaign. “The harms caused by the war on drugs are not fixed with this vote alone; the real healing begins when the DC Council develops a tax-and-regulate system based on racial and social justice.”

    The only loss on the day was in Florida, where a constitutional amendment to allow medical marijuana failed with 58 percent of the vote. In Florida, amendments put to the ballot require 60 percent to succeed.

    Political races be damned – election Tuesday was marijuana’s day … at least on Facebook.

    Image via DCMJ, Facebook

  • Marijuana Legalization: Feds Raid Denver Growers as Docs Testify Against Federal Laws

    Federal agents and local Denver police raided several marijuana grow operations this week. There was not much said, officially, about the raids, other than a statement from James Gothe, DEA group supervisor in Denver.

    “It’s a very large and successful investigation,” Gother told The Denver Post. “We’re assisting.”

    Whether these grow operations were all illegal grows or were state-licensed is not known at this time. But Mason Tvert, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project, suspects that they were likely all illegal.

    “Federal, state, and local law enforcement officials have only engaged in this type of activity when they suspect state laws are being violated,” Tvert said. “No details have been released, so it’s too early to say whether that is the case and whether any state laws have been broken. If they were, the individuals involved will face the consequences. If they weren’t, law enforcement will have some explaining to do.”

    The fact that there is even a question about the legality of the grow sites is due to the fact that, despite laws in Colorado, the Federal government in the United States still does not recognize marijuana as a legitimate medicinal substance, classifying it as a “Schedule I” drug, along with heroin and meth.

    That conflict was what brought doctors to a federal court in California recently. Several doctors testified that the classification of marijuana as having “no currently accepted medical treatment use” flies in the face of reality in medicine.

    The fact that the Federal government is currently turning a blind eye to legalization in places like Washington and Colorado leads one attorney to argue:

    “ …the action taken by the Department of Justice is either irrational, or more likely proves [that] marijuana does not fit the criteria of a Schedule I Controlled Substance.”

  • Marijuana Legalization: Doctors Argue War on Pot Has ‘No Footing in Reality’

    Marijuana legalization, either for medicinal or recreational use, is attracting lots of allies lately that formerly would not have been thought to side with pot.

    Law enforcement agents and government officials are starting to come around about the damaging effects of a Prohibition-style “War on Drugs”. The general public is seeing that many of the arguments put forth by legalization opponents are just not holding water any longer.

    Areas that have legalized marijuana in one form or another are reporting none of the crime spike or underage use issues that naysayers had predicted. In fact, traffic fatalities and prescription drug overdoses are down in those areas. And, as predicted, tax revenues are up.

    Now doctors are starting to speak out about the advisability, and even legality, of classifying cannabis as a Schedule I drug. The scheduling system allows the President of the United States the authority to place a substance on a list that declares it as meeting the following criteria:

    * The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
    * The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical treatment use in the U.S.
    * There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or substance under medical supervision.

    Some substances currently on the Schedule I list include:

    * Heroin (diacetylmorphine)
    * LSD (Lysergic acid diethylamide)
    * Marijuana (cannabis, THC)
    * Mescaline (Peyote)
    * MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine or “ecstasy”)
    * GHB (gamma-hydroxybutyric acid)
    * Ecstasy (MDMA or 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine)
    * Psilocybin
    * Methaqualone (Quaalude)
    * Khat (Cathinone)
    * Bath Salts (3,4-methylenedioxypyrovalerone or MDPV)

    Note that marijuana is on this list still, even though doctors in some states do prescribe it, which would seem to defy point two of the definition, above. MDMA is also on the list, even though it was regularly prescribed by psychiatrists for years before its abuse became fashionable.

    This is exactly what those doctors now point out.

    “[I]t is my considered opinion that including marijuana in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act is counter to all the scientific evidence in a society that uses and values empirical evidence,” Dr. Carl Hart, Associate Professor of Psychology at Columbia University said. “After two decades of intense scientific inquiry in this area, it has become apparent the current scheduling of cannabis has no footing in the realities of science and neurobiology.”

    Hart and other doctors are due to testify Monday in a Federal case listed as United States v. Pickard, et. al. This is a significant development in the legalization battle at the Federal level. The drug scheduling arrangement is completely Federal and is defended tirelessly by the Drug Czar’s office.

    Bertha Madras, former White House Drug Czar deputy director under George W. Bush, will also testify in defense of the current classification of marijuana as a Schedule I drug.

    Madras is fine with using THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, in medicinal applications. But she compares using unprocessed marijuana to achieve that use to other plant-based medicines that are not smoked or ingested.

    “Although more than 30% of current therapeutic drugs are plant-derived, no one currently eats or smokes foxglove plants to treat a heart condition, chews cinchona bark to alleviate malaria symptoms, or eats opium poppies to relieve post-surgical pain,” Madras writes.

    The problem with Madras’ comparison is that it willingly turns a blind eye to the fact that many people do, indeed, achieve relief of symptoms by smoking or ingesting marijuana. Foxglove is toxic; some have dies from eating it. Marijuana is not toxic at all. In fact, there has never been, in all of recorded history, a death from marijuana overdose.

    The opinion that cannabis is not harmful and should not be classified as Schedule I is not new. Richard Nixon is the president who first placed marijuana on the list, against the recommendation of his own National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse “little proven danger of physical or psychological harm from the experimental or intermittent use of the natural preparations of cannabis.”

    In addition, Nixon’s Commission actually recommended that possession of marijuana for personal use not be criminalized at all, and that distribution of small amounts for no profit not be an offense.

    That was in 1970. It has taken 44 years for this argument to make its way into a Federal courtroom again.

  • Marijuana Legalization: DC Plays the Race Card

    There are lots of reasons that states and cities have come up with to legalize marijuana, either for medical use or recreational. The medical side of things is pretty well-established. Even if you get the strong feeling that the idea of “medical marijuana” is overused, there is little denying anymore that it certainly does some people a whole lot of good.

    As far as recreational use, that often comes down to the simple fact that this is America, and in America we don’t tell our citizens that they can’t do something without a damn good reason. And the “reasons” for denying adults the right to smoke, eat, or otherwise consume marijuana are evaporating fast.

    Localities that have legalized marijuana in one form or another are boasting a drop in traffic fatalities, an increase in tax revenues, fewer prescription painkiller deaths, and no increase in underage use — all the opposite of what opponents claimed would happen.

    And now we have another popular argument for decriminalization or legalization being dusted off and brought to bear in the District of Columbia. That is the issue of race.

    Specifically, the idea is that black people are disproportionately prosecuted for the victimless “crime” of marijuana possession compared to the prosecution rates of white people. Some say that this is because black people are unfairly arrested more often than their marijuana-carrying white neighbors. Others say that this is simply because more black people use marijuana than white people.

    But the pro-pot line of reasoning in D.C. shortcuts both those arguments with a simple solution: legalize it.

    If the folks in D.C. pursue this line of logic, and do manage to legalize marijuana in some way, it could have far-reaching effects.

    “I think D.C. is going to probably set off a chain of events in which communities of color generally and cities in particular take on the issue of legalization as a racial justice, social justice issue in a much stronger way than they have so far,” said Bill Piper, director of national affairs at the Drug Policy Alliance.

    A successful legalization campaign in D.C., especially one that relies heavily on the argument of racial and social justice, could give other states yet another weapon to use in the legalization fight.

  • Marijuana Legalization: Could It Create Big Tobacco 2.0?

    Back in 2013, when former head of Microsoft corporate strategy Jamen Shivley announced that he was intent on developing an upscale medical marijuana retail concern that he dubbed “the Starbucks of marijuana”, heads turned.

    Shivley claimed this business as his birthright. The company he started is called Diego Pellicer (pronounced Pay-ee Sayer). Diego Pellicer was a real person. According to the company’s website:

    “Diego Pellicer … was the Spanish colonial vice governor of Cebu, a major island in the Philippine archipelago, [and] grew to become the largest grower of hemp in the world.”

    But Diego Pellicer is also Jamen Shivley’s great-grandfather.

    When Shivley announced his intention to become the Jeff Bezos of pot, Mexican president Vicente Fox stood behind him, in hopes that such a legitimate concern would ease the illegal business running out of his own country.

    A few months later, Shivley’s plan was catching some flack from the local pot growers and dispensers. They did not want this new thing to turn into another iteration of Big Tobacco.

    Diego Pellicer CEO Ron Throgmartin reportedly thought it was inevitable that medical marijuana would stay small indefinitely. But Diego Pellicer kept a low profile and waited. Still Shivley believed that he could “mint more millionaires than Microsoft in this business.”

    Now, in a piece in the Dallas Morning News, Kevin Sabet looks at the possibility of a Big Tobacco 2.0 with its hands in medical marijuana.

    One area of expansion is in the marijuana vending machine business. “It is like a gold rush,” remarked one vending executive. Sabet reports that there is also a new private equity firm that only invests in marijuana companies.

    Sabet sees the rise of vending machines, equity firms, and Shivley’s “Starbucks of marijuana” as a harbinger of no good to come. He compares these early days of marijuana legalization to the early claims of Big Tobacco that their product was actually good for you, recommended by doctors. But he argues that it is still an industry built on the premise of creating addicts.

    “It is true that marijuana is not as addictive as tobacco (in fact, tobacco is more addictive than even heroin),” Sabet writes. “And marijuana and tobacco differ among other dimensions of harm. Tobacco, though deadly, is not psychoactive. And unlike marijuana, one can drive impairment-free while smoking tobacco.”

    Sabet’s concern is that, although marijuana is less addictive than tobacco, it has intoxicating effects that tobacco does not.

    But it would seem that these effects puts marijuana it in more of a parallel with alcohol. In fact, this is the approach that almost everyone takes with marijuana: keep it away from kids; keep it out of the vehicle; keep it away from the workplace. This is a very different model from tobacco.

    The notion of what a bigger business model might do to the marijuana industry is worth looking at, but Sabet’s parallel seems to be flawed. A look at Big Alcohol might be more revealing and accurate.

  • Marijuana Legalization: New Survey Shows Americans Not Reversing on Legalization Trend

    Polling data company CivicScience has released the results of a new poll that show that Americans are more supportive than ever of the idea of legalizing marijuana. In fact, the majority of Americans are behind the idea, and the margin has grown since the last polling three months ago.

    Respondents were asked the question: “Would you support or oppose a law in your state that would legalize, tax, and regulate marijuana like alcohol?”

    Over the past two years, the question has been asked multiple times, with average results of: 58% of respondents support legalization; 35% oppose it; 7% have no strong opinion.

    But the more interesting tidbit of info mined from the poll is that there was a spike in support within the past three months: support bumps up to 61%, while 30% oppose, and 8% have no strong opinion.

    As for a further breakdown of the data, further revealing factoids include that men favor legalization only slightly more than women (60% vs. 55%). Young people between the ages of 25 and 34 were most likely to support legalization (67%), while folks over 65 oppose legalization by a margin of 50% oppose to 43% support.

    Also, 77% of people who polled as “loving reggae” music were legalization supporters. They also love Haagen-Dasz ice cream and Comedy Central.

    This seemingly stereotypical response did not concern the pollsters. But they also mentioned that legalization opponents claim to love Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter, shop at Walmart, and eat at Cracker Barrel.

    But one critical bit of data for the number crunchers to consider is that of voting involvement. According to the survey, 58% of supporters say they always vote in political elections, while 68% of non-supporters do.

    Of course, percentages are tricky things. What that means is that 58% of respondents support legalization, and 58% of that number vote. While only 35% oppose, and 68% of that number vote. That’s 33 out of 100 respondents voting for; and almost 24 out of 100 respondents actively voting against.

    At that rate, the trend toward legalization is not likely to reverse.

  • Marijuana Legalization Shocker: Legalized States Have Fewer Painkiller Deaths

    In a bit of news that will surely give anti-legalization forces cause for worry, CNN reports that states that have legalized marijuana for medical purposes are reporting much lower death tolls due to painkiller overdose.

    The Journal of the American Medical Association released the supporting data behind this discovery. The study reviewed medical marijuana laws and death certificate data between 1999 and 2010. During this period only 13 states had legalized marijuana for medical purposes.

    “We found there was about a 25% lower rate of prescription painkiller overdose deaths on average after implementation of a medical marijuana law,” lead study author Dr. Marcus Bachhuber said in the article.

    Just in the year 2010, the number of overdose deaths was down by 1,700.

    While Bachbauer recognizes the facts of the data, he is quick to point out that this is not the only factor to consider, and that medical marijuana is one choice.

    “It can be challenging for people to control chronic pain, so I think the more options we have the better,” he said. “But I think it’s important, of course, to weigh the risks and benefits of medical marijuana.”

    Another senior author on the JAMA study, Colleen Barry, associate professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, calls deaths due to prescription painkiller overdose a “national public health crisis”.

    “As our awareness of the addiction and overdose risks … grows, individuals with chronic pain and their medical providers may be opting to treat pain entirely or in part with medical marijuana.”

    This newly-discovered benefit of legalizing medical marijuana can be added to the already-existing factors of lower traffic fatalities and reduced teen marijuana use in states that have legalized pot.

  • Marijuana Legalization: The Nightmare of Traveling Between States

    The pros and cons of marijuana legalization have been debated for decades, but only recent have moves been made to legalize or even just decriminalize marijuana in entire states within the United States. Those states that have gone the full legalization route, even if only for medical marijuana, have been touting outright improvements in areas that opponents had claimed would deteriorate.

    For example, pot opponents had said that legalizing pot would lead to increased use among teens, but the opposite has happened. They warned that traffic fatalities would spike, but they have gone down. They said that teens should develop a calloused attitude about drug use, but all that has happened is that teens no longer see pot as the demon substance they were long told. But they still have a healthy respect for substances that cause real problems.

    But not all states are seeing the light about marijuana legalization. It is the right of each state to decide for itself. But when people find themselves traveling between neighboring states or on even longer interstate travels, they may run afoul of laws different from their home state.

    This was the case for B.J. Patel. Patel holds a medical marijuana card, with which he can legally buy marijuana in his home state of California. But Patel was driving a Uhaul from California to Ohio when he was pulled over by police in Oklahoma. The county deputy who stopped him noticed his medical marijuana card. He asked where Patel’s marijuana was, and Patel had indeed brought some with him, since it is his medicine.

    In the end, Patel was arrested and now faces felony charges in Oklahoma fr something that is perfectly legal in the state where he lives.

    Another example of this disparity is the state of Idaho. Idaho is surrounded on three sides by states with more lax marijuana laws. As a result of this difference, Idaho law enforcement has seized three times more marijuana so far in 2014 as they did in all of 2011.

    That is the quandary of living in the United States: easy interstate travel, but vastly different laws.

  • Marijuana Legalization: Jeb Bush Just Says No in Florida

    Come November, when Floridians go to the ballot box, they will have the opportunity to vote on a ballot initiative to legalize medical marijuana in Florida. The initiative is extremely popular in the Sunshine State, with 88 percent support among residents.

    Florida’s voters have had the opportunity to see how legalization in varying degrees has panned out in other states. Perhaps they have heard that traffic fatalities are actually down in Denver. Or perhaps they now know that the dire predictions of rampant underage marijuana use have never come to pass. In fact, underage use is down, thanks to growers and sellers who will do whatever it takes to keep kids from buying. Whatever has done the trick, the pleas of legalization opponents is finding no purchase in voters who respond to polling.

    Now former Florida governor and heir to the Bush family political dynasty, Jeb Bush, is coming out to make his opinion known. Jeb Bush says Florida should Just Say No to medical marijuana because is makes the state look bad.

    “Florida leaders and citizens have worked for years to make the Sunshine State a world-class location to start or run a business, a family-friendly destination for tourism and a desirable place to raise a family or retire,” Bush said.

    “Allowing large-scale, marijuana operations to take root across Florida, under the guise of using it for medicinal purposes, runs counter to all of these efforts. I strongly urge Floridians to vote against Amendment 2 this November,” he said.

    When an initiative is as strongly supported as this one is in Florida, it doesn’t much matter where any one politician lands on it. It is going to pass anyway. Perhaps Bush is laying groundwork for his future presidential run plans by staking out his position on this topic now for his base of conservative voters. Then, once the initiative passes anyway, he can always say he opposed it, with no consequence.

    In any case, Florida voters are overwhelmingly turning pro-pot. Not only is the medical marijuana initiative receiving strong support, as noted, but even the notion of legalizing recreational use makes a strong showing. Fifty-five percent of Floridians are supportive of legalizing adult recreational use of marijuana, and only 41 percent oppose it.

    Image via YouTube

  • Marijuana Legalization: Colo. Youth Smoking Less Pot

    It is a statistic that flies in the face of everything that legalization opponents thought. Despite dire prognostications to the contrary, a new survey by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment reveals that high school-age use of marijuana has dropped from 22% to 20% since pot was legalized there.

    The thing that makes this even more stunning is that the attitudes of these kids about pot has changed, as well. They actually have stopped believing the “pot is dangerous” messages they hear from anti-pot voices in the media. Formerly, 58% of high-schoolers “perceived a moderate or great risk from marijuana use”. Now, that number is down to 54%.

    So, to be clear, fewer students believe that pot is dangerous. But, nonetheless, fewer students are using it.

    The threat that legalizing pot would bring about a rise in use among youth is the pot debate equivalent of “we’ll find WMDs in Iraq and be out of there fast” prediction. It just isn’t materializing. It’s almost as confusing as the fact that traffic fatalities are also down since legalization.

    Still, some are doubling down on the worry, despite evidence to the contrary.

    “If we want Colorado to be the healthiest state in the nation, then we need to make sure our youngest citizens understand the risks of using potentially harmful substances,” said Larry Wolk, executive director and chief medical officer for the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. “Later this month, we’ll launch a youth prevention campaign that encourages kids not to risk damaging their growing brains by experimenting with marijuana.”

    So, even though use is down, they worry that use will go up. This is more of the same logic that was floating around Congress when Colorado first made its decision to legalize.

    “As marijuana is de-stigmatized, use goes up, and it finds its way into the homes and candy and cookies and baked goods, and once it gets there, it finds its way into the brains of teens,” Rep. John Fleming (R-La.) said back then. “Marijuana will also become more pervasive as states continue to embrace permissible laws on medical marijuana and the recreational use of marijuana, and kids and youth will have easier access to the dangerous, addictive drug.”

    Perhaps these anti-pot folks should stop and think about the fact that these kids aren’t stupid. They don’t buy the “pot is dangerous” argument anymore because they know who is selling it: pharmaceutical companies. Like Chris Rock said, “They don’t want you to use your drugs; they want you to use their drugs.”

    Image via YouTube

  • Marijuana Legalization: The White House Fights Back

    One by one, states are taking matters into their own hands and legalizing marijuana in one form or another. For some, it is for medicinal purposes, commonly called “medical marijuana”. For others, they simply go the route of either “decriminalizing” marijuana — which means reducing possession from a felony to a misdemeanor — or legalizing it entirely.

    Just because a state decides to not arrest people in possession of marijuana, doesn’t mean the federal government is going to sit back and allow it. Marijuana is considered a Schedule I drug. To be on Schedule I, the following criteria must be met:

    1. The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
    2. The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
    3. There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision

    This puts marijuana on the same list as heroin, meth, angel dust, and many other very powerful drugs. And it means that the Drug enforcement Agency has a mandate to go after anyone in possession of it.

    Recently, the New York Times editorial department officially came out in favor of federal legalization of marijuana, letting the issue of its criminality be left up to individual states, without fear of reprisals or loss of funding in other areas from the federal government.

    After a series of editorials calling for legalization, the White House responded with a write-up of its own.

    The Office of National Drug Control Policy issued the extensive response, which mainly stated many of the usual talking points against legalization.

    “The editors of The New York Times may have valid concerns about disproportionality throughout our criminal justice system. But we as policy makers cannot ignore the basic scientific fact that marijuana is addictive and marijuana use has harmful consequences. Increased consumption leads to higher public health and financial costs for society. Addictive substances like alcohol and tobacco, which are legal and taxed, already result in much higher social costs than the revenue they generate. The cost to society of alcohol alone is estimated to be more than 15 times the revenue gained by its taxation. For this reason, the Obama Administration and the Office of National Drug Control Policy remain committed to drug use prevention, treatment, support for recovery, and innovative criminal justice strategies to break the cycle of drug use and associated crime.”

    The White House uses the argument that alcohol cost is higher than revenue, yet alcohol is legal. Cost/revenue comparison alone is no reason to deny individuals the freedom to make a personal choice about their bodies. We tried that once. The cost of Prohibition was far too high.

    And that is the error in logic the White House makes, comparing only the benefit of revenue, that is to say taxes, from legalizing something, be it alcohol or drugs. They ignore the high cost of fighting a black market and all the violence and criminal behavior that go along with it.

    The major points the Obama administration raised include:

    1. Marijuana use affects the developing brain.
    2. Substance use in school age children has a detrimental effect on their academic achievement.
    3. Marijuana is addictive.
    4. Drugged driving is a threat to our roadways.

    Each of these points have been addressed and found wanting many times before. Curtailing access of young persons to marijuana, much as they are kept from buying cigarettes or alcohol, would solve three of the four issues. Marijuana growers and sellers welcome age restrictions and enforce them stridently.

    As for the drugged driving issue, this has been proven to be a total error in logic. Anyone who has smoked marijuana in the past week or more, then is in a car accident, is considered to have “marijuana present” in his system, and therefore it is chalked up as a factor in the accident.

    The fact is, in areas where marijuana is legalized, vehicle accidents have actually gone down.

    The true reasons for the White House doubling down on faulty policy are likely more about politics and election year positioning and posing. No one wants to come out as in favor of legalizing, lest they fall on the same grenade as Ron Paul has every time. It is an unpopular position for someone who needs donors, sponsors, and lobbyists behind him. For that reason, they ignore the voices of those who they should really be listening to, the voters who are turning states green every year.

    Image via YouTube

  • Marijuana Legalization Debate Creates Sharp Divide

    “The Times They Are a-Changin’” sang Bob Dylan in the title track of his 1964 album by the same name. And very few issues underscore how much they’re changing in modern day America than the movement to legalize marijuana.

    Although marijuana has been regulated as a drug by every state since the mid-1930s, it was first listed as a Schedule I drug during the enacting of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. Schedule I drugs are defined as “drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.”

    In 2014, the movement to legalize marijuana on a state and federal level has gained incredible momentum, with marijuana becoming legal in Colorado and Washington for recreational use and even the New York Times publicly supporting legalization.

    Here is a look at both sides of the divide, starting with the proponents of marijuana legalization.

    Proponents of Marijuana Legalization

    Who They Are: Many coalition groups formed to support legalizing marijuana, including the National Cannabis Industry Association; many publications, including the New York Times; and 58 percent of Americans, according to a 2013 Gallup poll.

    What They’re Saying: Arguments range from bombastic rhetoric to well thought-out and defined logical arguments about why marijuana should be legalized. The gist is that marijuana is less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes, two drugs legal and widely consumed. Marijuana also has medicinal purposes in treating serious illnesses such as Lou Gehrig’s disease and multiple sclerosis. And there is also a social justice issue at play, as African Americans and Latinos, especially young men within those subsets, are disproportionately arrested for marijuana use, as shown in this study from California.

    Opponents of Marijuana Legalization

    Who They Are: Many coalition groups formed to oppose legalizing marijuana, including Smart Approaches to Marijuana; the American Medical Association, from a 2013 article; and 39 percent of America, according to the same 2013 Gallup poll.

    What They’re Saying: Arguments on this side of the divide can be equally bombastic but well thought-out and defined logical arguments pervade as well. The gist here is that marijuana can be psychologically addictive, can damage the development of the brains of people under the age of 18, and can lead to more road accidents when people smoke and drive. While the tide has certainly turned in the favor of legalizing marijuana in the court of public opinion, these staunch opponents of marijuana legalization still have their say, as when dueling advertisements were run in the New York Times, one for marijuana legalization and one against.

    It remains to be seen if marijuana will be legalized at the federal level, removed from the list of Schedule I drugs, and promoted for recreational use nationwide by companies that are now part of the booming marijuana industry. But in the end, both sides will have their say.

    The times, yes, they are a-changin.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Marijuana Legalization: DC to Vote in November

    It’s official. Our nation’s capital is going to have a ballot vote to decide if pot will be legalized in the DC area.

    The Washington Board of Elections determined that the DC Cannabis Campaign had indeed collected enough signatures to get Initiative 71 on the ballot on November 4 of this year. In fact, the campaign collected 57,000 signatures, more than double the number needed to get on the ballot.

    “It is clear from the number of signatures the campaign was able to submit that citizens want a major change in D.C.’s marijuana laws,” Dr. Malik Burnett, District policy manager for the Drug Policy Alliance.

    At issue on the ballot is whether or not adults over the age of 21 can legally possess up to two ounces of marijuana and grow up to six marijuana plants at home. There is no mention in this initiative of selling marijuana, only personal possession.

    Just last month, DC joined other states in decriminalizing marijuana. The difference between decriminalizing and legalizing may seem minimal to some. But decriminalized pot still brings with it the possibility of fines and court costs, just no jail time and felony criminal charges. Legalized pot bears no penalty whatsoever.

    If the ballot initiative were to pass, it could be problematic for the district. The area of DC is not a state. It has no state constitution and autonomy. Its constitutional oversight lies directly with the U.S. Congress, which has forbidden legalizing or reducing marijuana penalties in Washington. DC has already tried once to legalize pot, but were blocked by budget maneuvering in Congress. Supporters say they are ready for such moves this time.

    “We will not let history repeat itself,” D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton said in a release. “Republicans tried to prevent D.C. from voting on an initiative in 1998 to legalize medical marijuana, and after voters approved it, blocked its implementation with an appropriations rider for more than 10 years. We are not surprised that Republicans are threatening to again use the power of the federal government to block the will of the voters of a local jurisdiction. Many Republicans abandon their professed support of local control of local affairs when they have an opportunity to bully the residents of the District, who cannot hold them accountable at the ballot box. We have already begun working with our allies to protect the will of D.C. voters.”

    In fact, this move in the very city of the nation’s capital flies on the face of the official stance of the Obama administration. In response to a recent New York Times editorial series calling for the federal legalization of marijuana — removing pot from the drug schedule as a Scehdule I substance, and leaving the issue to individual state to decide — the Obama administration issued this statement from the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

    “The editors of The New York Times may have valid concerns about disproportionality throughout our criminal justice system. But we as policy makers cannot ignore the basic scientific fact that marijuana is addictive and marijuana use has harmful consequences. Increased consumption leads to higher public health and financial costs for society. Addictive substances like alcohol and tobacco, which are legal and taxed, already result in much higher social costs than the revenue they generate. The cost to society of alcohol alone is estimated to be more than 15 times the revenue gained by its taxation. For this reason, the Obama Administration and the Office of National Drug Control Policy remain committed to drug use prevention, treatment, support for recovery, and innovative criminal justice strategies to break the cycle of drug use and associated crime.”

    If pot is legalized across the street from the White House, the effect on the national legalization debate could be profound.

    Image via YouTube

  • Marijuana Legalization AMA: NY Times in the Hotseat

    Marijuana Legalization AMA: NY Times in the Hotseat

    Andrew Rosenthal, the editorial page editor of The New York Times, along with David Firestone and Juliet Lapidos, who contributed to a series of New York Times editorials calling on the federal government to lift the ban on marijuana, conducted a Reddit AMA (Ask Me Anything) today. Though they briefly fielded a handful of other topics, they were there specifically to talk pot.

    The Times’ editorial series on legalization has drawn a lot of attention. An endorsement of this kind carries a lot of weight and lends an air of respectability to an issue that many people had heretofore seen as just for stoners.

    Rosenthal told Reddit participants that, “The editorial board decided to make the call after considering the high social costs, and general absurdity, of the ban — which is still based on the classification of weed as a Schedule 1 substance, like heroin and LSD. The series, which considered health, politics, history, criminal justice, and the experience in Colorado with legalization, led to a vigorous and fascinating conversation among readers on the Times site.”

    The array of questions posed to the Times’ folks was in keeping with the usual no-holds-barred probing from Redditors. There were jokesters, but there were some hard-hitting interrogatories too.

    One of the topics that Redditors took the Times to task over was how their “legalize it” stance conflicts with the Times’ own drug testing policy.

    User “MarijuanaMajority” asked: “Former Times executive editor Bill Keller said on Reddit earlier today that the Times endorsing marijuana legalization while at the same time drug testing journalists for marijuana is ‘increasingly difficult to defend,’ pointing out its ‘inconsistency.’ Do you agree with him and the nearly 5,000 people that have signed a petition asking the Times to end the practice of checking the content of reporters’ urine before they’re allowed to byline stories?”

    The editors on the AMA had an answer: “The issue of drug testing is a matter of corporate policy, and I don’t make corporate policy, and neither does anyone else in the editorial department. I was asked about this the other day by Chris Hayes and I said that if they asked me, I would say we should stop testing for marijuana use, but that I’m not all that sure I will be asked.”

    Getting politicians to talk about legalizing marijuana, whether for or against, is pretty tough. For most candidates, there is no good answer that will no lose them voters. Rosenthal was asked about that, as well.

    “I think the candidates should be honest in saying what their views are. This is just not a third-rail issue anymore. I’m hoping that a serious candidate will in fact endorse the repeal of the federal ban on weed. If I were moderating a debate in 2016, assuming things go on like they are now, then I would certainly ask about it. With any luck, more progress will have been made on this issue by then.”

    The editors were specific in saying that they were calling for a lift on the federal marijuana ban, leaving the issue up to the individual states. Whether or not the states should allow legalization may be a different matter.

    “What we have called for is an end to the federal marijuana ban, which will allow states to decide for themselves, based on the very kind of value judgments that David [Brooks] made in his column, and in other places. David would agree with us that the federal ban should be ended. He would then go on to argue that states should not legalize recreational use. That is just the kind of debate we need to have about marijuana.

    Finally, Rosenthal pulled back the curtain on the reasons why the Times is addressing this issue now.

    “Perhaps the biggest motivation for doing this series, and making such a big deal out of it, is that prohibition repeal is a criminal justice and civil rights issue. The enforcement of marijuana laws has a heavily racist slant in this country. An African American is far more likely to be arrested for simple possession, put on trial, convicted and sent to prison. Righting this wrong is imperative. As a society we should never tolerate a situation in which young black men go to prison for doing some that well-off white people are doing with impunity.”

    Image via YouTube

  • Marijuana Legalization Foes Losing the Battle

    Marijuana Legalization Foes Losing the Battle

    Marijuana legalization is a battle that has gone on for decades. Proponents of legal marijuana, whether it be for medical purposes or for recreational, have pointed out one of the greatest arguments against prohibition ever: prohibition of something that this many people want and will find a way to get creates a black market. That black market creates violence.

    Other effective points include the loss of tax base money by ignoring pot as a revenue source, the usefulness of marijuana as medicine, the overcrowding of prisons with people charged with victimless crimes, and the misappropriation of law enforcement to play budget games pursuing these victimless crimes.

    These arguments are making inroads into the American perception of pot. Everyone knows someone who smokes pot. And chances are, if we knew which of our friends did, we’d be surprised at how normal they are.

    One of the tactics of the legalization forces is to take each item in the criminalization argument and dismantle it with research and facts. Nonetheless, anti-legalization forces still fall back on the same batch of arguments. Here are three that you will hear almost every time a news channel puts a pair of faces side-by-side to debate the issue.

    Opponents often argue that, if marijuana is legalized in any fashion, medical or recreational …

    Crime Will Go Up

    This particular argument can best be understood by taking a step back and looking at a bit of “causality” logic. Anti-pot folks say things like, “Marijuana [is] the most popular drug used by men who [have] been arrested.”

    Pro-pot folks reply, “Sure it is. That’s because you arrest thousands of them for possessing marijuana!”

    Another way of looking at this “causality” argument is demonstrated by Steve Fox of the Marijuana Policy Project.

    “We could release a study tomorrow showing that 98 percent of arrestees in the United States drank water in the 48 hours before they engaged in criminal behavior. Does that mean that water causes crime? Fortunately, the American people are smarter than the drug czar thinks they are.”

    The danger that anti-pot folks promote is the notion that, if more people are using marijuana, these people will commit more crimes, including rapes, murders, assaults, etc.

    One doomsayer said, “Thugs put on masks, they come to your house, they kick in your door. They point guns at you and say, ‘Give me your marijuana, give me your money,’”

    Anyone who has ever been high knows that there is something inherently wrong with this line of logic. But let’s let the numbers do the talking. As MSNBC reported after Denver legalized pot:

    “According to data from the Denver Police Department, violent crime (including homicide, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault) fell by 6.9% in the first quarter of 2014, compared with the same period in 2013. Property crime (including burglary, larceny, auto theft, theft from motor vehicle and arson) dropped by 11.1%.”

    Other states have seen similar drops or flatlines in crime.

    DUI Incidents Will Go Up

    Crime in general is one thing, but some worry that DUI incidents will rise. Some point out that, in cities like Denver, the presence of marijuana in the system of a person killed in an accident has tripled. But pro-pot folks have a simple answer to that.

    Marijuana is detectable in the blood for one week after consumption. Just because someone is found to have smoked within the last week, or even that day, does not mean that they are impaired at the time of an accident.

    In fact, pro-pot folks point out that marijuana legalization actually leads to a decrease in traffic fatalities because some people choose to use pot rather than alcohol, which has much worse impairment effects, as well as a general tendency toward activity that pot-smoking does not induce in most people.

    The general wisdom is, people go to bars and parties, get drunk, and drive home. People stay home and smoke pot, which keeps them off the road.

    What about the stats on that?

    According to the National Household Survey on Drug Use and Health and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, fatal car wrecks dropped by 9% in states that legalized medical use. And “the rate of fatal crashes in which a driver had consumed any alcohol dropped 12% after medical marijuana was legalized, and crashes involving high levels of alcohol consumption fell 14%.”

    Kids Will Get It

    “Kids are going to be bombarded with this – they’re already getting the message that it’s acceptable,” said Kevin Sabet, Director of the University of Florida Drug Policy Institute.

    But legalization proponents point out that logic says otherwise.

    “Forcing marijuana sales into the underground market is the worst possible policy when it comes to protecting our young people,” said a spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project, a pro-legalization group. “It is odd that those who wish to keep marijuana out of the hands of kids are fighting to keep it as uncontrolled as possible.”

    When voters of a state decide to legalize marijuana, that move brings with it heavy regulation, including stiff penalties for any business that sells to underage buyers. The fact is, legal marijuana shops don’t want kids anywhere near their doors.

    Colorado goes even further, barring any advertising of marijuana that aims at children, much as was done for cigarettes.

    As long as marijuana is unregulated, criminal salespeople make no differentiation about who they sell to.

    But forget theorizing about the possible effects in this area. What about states that have already gone the legalization route? Are they noticing any difference?

    According to a Youth Risk Behavior Survey done by the CDC in states that have legalized pot, “The effect of passing a medical marijuana law on youth consumption appears to be zero across the board.”

    Image via YouTube

  • Marijuana Legalization: New York Times Editorial Sparks Debate

    The issue of marijuana legalization has been weighing on policymakers and the general public lately with increasing news of the drug’s medical benefits as well as its legalization in states such as Colorado and Washington State. Now, more than ever, opinions are flooding the Internet on whether marijuana should be allowed regulated consumption by the public or continue to be prohibited across most of the United States.

    On July 27, 2014, The New York Times Editorial Board published an open letter titled, “Repeal Prohibition, Again,” which discussed their stand on marijuana legalization. In it, members of the board urged the Federal government to “allow recreational or medicinal production and use where it belongs — at the state level,” saying that marijuana is less dangerous than two other legal substances that have caused more deaths and diseases, namely, alcohol and tobacco.

    They urge states to legalize medicinal uses of marijuana, reduce penalties or simply allow all use, restricting it to those above the age of 21 in order not to produce harmful effects in the adolescent brain. Members of the board believe that creating systems for regulating manufacture, sale, and marketing of marijuana will be a long and arduous process but ultimately one that will produce medical breakthroughs and reduce the number of people put in prison for nonviolent drug offenses.

    Many dissenting and assenting reactions surfaced with the publication of The New York Times editorial, echoing the debates sparked across the country by this issue. Some opponents to marijuana legalization cited the effects of poor regulation of alcohol and tobacco as evidence that legalizing a harmful substance would not deter younger members of society from using it.

    An ad taken out by Project SAM in reaction to the editorial posits that corporations that stand to make money from marijuana legalization will crop up and base their revenue on a “highly habit-forming product,” implying that the market system might not be ready for such a glut. Project SAM is against legalization but in favor of dropping minimum sentences and removing the criminal records of low-level users of marijuana, while pushing for better access to treatment and education.

    Meanwhile, many are hopeful that the legalization of marijuana will allow advanced research into its medical benefits and find treatment for a number of complex diseases. Many voices are also urging the government to wait and see until Colorado and Washington State have implemented legalization of marijuana successfully, especially in the area of underage restriction, before taking the legalization plunge.

    Image via YouTube

  • Marijuana Legalization Spikes Teen Use? Nope.

    For many years, there were several arguments that anti-legalization forces leaned on to keep pot at bay, medicinal or otherwise. One by one those arguments have been deflated and disproven.

    As it turns out, marijuana is not a “gateway” to harder drugs. It does not cause mental illness. It is not physically addictive, in the same way that nicotine is.

    In fact, states that enacted marijuana laws have seen an average 13% drop in traffic fatalities because people substitute pot smoking for alcohol consumption, and pot use tends to be more of an at-home recreation.

    With public opinion softening on pot in general, one of the arguments that the anti-weed folks have been leaning into is that it would lead to higher instances of teen and youth pot use and arrest.

    Which brings us to a recent Washington Post piece. According to data collected in American states where pot restrictions have been loosened to allow for medical marijuana, use among teens, and especially arrests, has barely moved the needle.

    The article cites a study called the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System, a CDC program that tracks various risky factors for youth, including alcohol use, dietary issues, sexual behaviors, etc. According to one of the study’s co-authors, Daniel Rees, “the effect of massing a medical marijuana law on youth consumption appears to be zero across the board.”

    The Youth Risk Behavior Study from 1993 through 2011, states specifically that there is “little evidence of a relationship between legalizing medical marijuana and the use of marijuana among high school students.”

    One reason that researchers think that youth consumption does not go up when marijuana is legalized is that sellers are not willing to risk their legal sales to make a few bucks off underage purchase attempts. As one paper puts it, “legalization allows suppliers to sell to adults with some assurance of not being prosecuted, while selling marijuana to a minor is still a risky proposition even with the legalization of medical marijuana.”

    Bit by bit, the legal hurdles to legalization are coming down, as each argument is being studied and refuted in areas that have led the way in legalization.

    Image via YouTube

  • Marijuana Legalization: Oregon Has Enough Signatures To Qualify For November Ballot

    Marijuana supporters in Oregon have collected more than enough signatures to qualify for November’s ballot for legalizing recreational marijuana.

    Peter Zuckerman, spokesman for New Approach Oregon, said that they will continue getting signatures until they feel that they have “a big enough margin.” To date, the group has already collected more than 100,000 signatures. They only need 87,213 signatures from registered voters by July 3.

    Despite already having more than they need, the group decided to continue seeking supporters who can vote, so that they can account for invalid signatures. They are aiming for a 25 to 30 percent buffer.

    The signatures collected by the group will have to be validated by the state.

    New Approach Oregon gets signatures by telling the citizens and voters of Oregon that marijuana arrests waste police, court, and attorney time, and also waste tax dollars . The group’s campaign manager Dan Mahr said, “We need to stop wasting taxpayer dollars on treating marijuana as a crime. Our country has spent 40 years and more than $1 trillion dollars on the War on Drugs. Prohibition is ineffective and costs the state tax revenue.”

    If the law were passed, it would mean that citizens of Oregon can have up to eight ounces of marijuana in possession. They can also grow up to four marijuana plants. The taxes would be $5 per plant and $35 per ounce.

    Reports said that over $620,000 has already been spent for the marijuana legalization in Oregon. In 1998, voters legalized medical marijuana for patients who are suffering from severe pain, cancer, and other medical conditions.

    Based on information from the latest polling, citizens of Oregon will most likely pass the law. Just last week, the poll revealed that voters support the legalization of marijuana 51 percent against 41 percent who are not in favor.

    Image via YouTube

  • Alaska Marijuana: State Takes First Step To Legalization

    Some 46,000 supporters of a ballot initiative to legalize cannabis turned in their signatures to election officials on Wednesday. This marks Alaska’s first step towards an August ballot on the matter. Some 30,000 validated signatures are required to take the issue to a vote.

    Advocates of the weed believe that the time is right for legalizing marijuana. The group that initiated the move for legalization calls itself the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana. It is mainly funded by the Marijuana Policy Project, a Washington D.C. based marijuana reform group.

    Proponents of the campaign pointed out that marijuana was already being used in Alaska; legalizing marijuana would “regulate and tax it” just like alcohol is treated.

    Meanwhile, opponents of the recreational use of marijuana say Alaska’s marijuana laws are already liberal enough. Marijuana use has been legal in Alaska since 1998 when voters voted to legalize its use for medical purposes. Since then, there has been a strong debate in Alaska on whether to ban or legalize it.

    This is not the first time legalization for recreational use of marijuana has been on the ballot. In 2000, the initiative got 41% approval vote and another attempt in 2004 garnered 44 % of the vote.

    The supporters of the campaign now think the country has changed since then. According to Mason Tvert of the Marijuana Policy Project, polls show that majority of Alaska residents are not opposed to legalization of cannabis.

    Bill Parker, one of the initiative’s sponsors and former Department of Corrections deputy commissioner said the current marijuana laws in Alaska are contradictory: “In the insane way it fell together, it’s legal to have it in your home but not to acquire it. And you can legally acquire it with a medical prescription but there’s no place to buy it.”

    If marijuana use does become legal, persons over 21-years-old will be allowed to buy up to an ounce of marijuana or grow up to 6 plants for personal use. However, users can only be allowed to smoke it on private properties. Only licensed sellers will be allowed to sell it. Alaska’s ballot initiative mirrors that of Colorado’s 2012 initiative which led to the state’s legalization of marijuana on January 1st of this year.

    Image via YouTube

  • Marijuana Legalization: Long Lines Form for Purchase

    Recreational marijuana became legal in Colorado on Wednesday.

    What started out as a a few people lining up outside pot shops early Wednesday quickly grew to crowds of hundreds as the day progressed.

    With the rise in demand came the rise in prices as well. One shop reportedly raised its price for an eighth of an ounce from $25 to $45.

    “What I love about it is the peacefulness of the crowd … and the diversity,” said Denver City Councilman Albus Brooks.

    Chrissy and Logan Robinson were one of the first in line at one shop.

    “I’ve been waiting 34 years for this moment,” Chrissy said. “I’ve been smoking since I was 14. No more sneaking around.”

    John Stiltz, 62, was a customer who stood in line to mark the occasion.

    “I smoked pot for the first time when I was 16 in the ’60s,” Stiltz said. “I looked forward to the day when a harmless, recreational drug would be legal. I wanted to be part of the history.”

    Marijuana sales are illegal in the United State under Federal Law and while other countries have decriminalization policies towards the purchase of marijuana, Colorado is the first in the world to go this far in the legalization of marijuana, and with it, comes the watchful eye of the world.

    According to state law, a Colorado resident can buy and possess up to an ounce of pot, while those with an out of state ID can buy a quarter of an ounce. With it comes a 25% state tax on top of the usual sales tax of 2.9%.

    People came from all over the United States to mark the occasion. John Gray, who came from St. Louis said, “I’m like, they legalized pot today? So here I am.”

    “It’s glorious!” said another man from Omaha.

    Opponents of legalization were not as thrilled with the significance of the day.

    Former White House drug-policy adviser Kevin Sabet said Wednesday marks the dawn of “Big Marijuana.”

    “In any addictive industry, such as this one, the only way to make money is off of addiction,” Sabet said.

    Image via Wikimedia