Possible Ballot Initiative in California will Legalize Marijuana in 2010

Search

New member
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
7,373
Tokens
Pot advocates want Calif to vote on legalization

By MARCUS WOHLSEN Associated Press Writer
Updated: 06/11/2009 01:00:08 PM PDT

SAN FRANCISCO—Californians could legally possess up to one ounce of pot and cities could sell and tax the drug under an initiative marijuana advocates want to place on the state's 2010 ballot.

The Control, Regulate and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 is being pushed by pot activists who sense a positive shift in public sentiment toward the federally banned substance. A recent Field Poll found that 56 percent of California voters supported legalizing marijuana for recreational use and taxing its proceeds.
Backers of the ballot proposal include entrepreneurs in the state's medical marijuana industry, which has become lucrative since California voters legalized marijuana for medical use in 1996.

One of the leading proponents is Richard Lee, an Oakland pot dispensary owner and founder of Oaksterdam University, a medical marijuana trade school. As California cities confront plummeting revenues and the state's massive budget crisis, Lee said voters will be open to new ways to fill public coffers.

"We can't waste money enforcing laws that over 50 percent of people don't think should be in place," Lee said.

Supporters expect to finalize the proposal's language by the end of the month. The latest draft gives anyone age 21 or older the right to possess up to one ounce of marijuana for personal use. Local and state authorities could raise that amount.

Residents would also have the right to cultivate up to 25-square-foot plots of marijuana on private

property, but only for personal consumption.
At the same time, cities that did not want marijuana within their limits could continue to bar sales, though they would still have to permit possession.
For the initiative to reach the November 2010 ballot, supporters must gather more than 433,000 valid signatures from registered voters. Lee said he believes they could complete that process by January.

The would-be ballot initiative is not the only effort under way to liberalize pot laws. Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, is pushing a bill in the state legislature that would regulate marijuana much like alcohol.

Under Ammiano's proposal, pot would be taxed at a rate of $50 per ounce and bring an estimated $1 billion in tax proceeds. The legislation would only allow taxes on pot to be collected once the federal government lifts its restrictions on marijuana.

Some critics have said they do not anticipate the federal government will budge anytime soon. Under federal law, any possession of marijuana is illegal.
Lee said a ballot initiative is quicker than waiting for any bill on the contentious issue of marijuana legalization to grind through the legislative process.
 

"Here we go again"
Joined
Jul 1, 2006
Messages
4,507
Tokens
We can hope, but no way in hell the feds will let this happen. In California they are still raiding medical marijuana dispensaries after Obama promised they would stop. In Denver they legalized marijuana for personal use but the feds simply came in and made it clear they have the automatic weapons and they make the rules, regardless of what the people vote for. Flat out sickning.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
There have only been a couple of raids on California MMJ outlets since Obama took office and those were outlets which were also violating California laws which regulate legal MMJ distribution.

So far, the USDOJ has respected the edict issued by AG Holder that no outlets would be raided provided they were complying with appropriate state and local laws as passed within the decade since Prop 215 was made law in 1996

Meanwhile in Denver, very few people are being arrested for marijuana possession and certainly no one (based on the info I have from my colleagues at SAFER) is being arrested by federal agents.

===
In short, marijuana is already quasi-legal for both Californians and also residents in numerous other states. It is fully legal to possess within the home (up to 4ozs) in the state of Alaska and the feds aren't saying boo.

President Obama has expressed absolutely zero interest in perpetuating the past 38 years of aggressive enforcement against marijuana use by adults. Failing such interest on his part, we can be confident that if California voters pass an initiative, the feds will not interfere with anyone that is complying with the passed laws
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
Or, to put it more simply - if the state of California removes criminal laws against 1 oz possession and modest amounts of personal cultivation, the feds can beef all they want and it won't make a shit of difference.

It's reasonable to submit that between 3 to 5 million California residents use marijuana and the feds would be utterly incapable of impeding that if the vast majority kept under the state legal radar.
 

"Here we go again"
Joined
Jul 1, 2006
Messages
4,507
Tokens
In Denver local police the arrests haven't gone downhill drastically since the law has passed. The local police are being told by the feds to arrest citizens under federal law for smoking marijuana. AKA, the feds essentially forcing local departments to arrest marijuana smokers under federal law.


As for medical marijuana dispensaries, they are still raiding all dispensaries which are getting ANY INCOME. Even if they are non-profit. Essentially making it impossible to help sick and dying people unless someone extremely wealthy puts up large amounts of cash to bankroll it.

No other non-profit businesses are run this way. They are still specifically targeting medical marijuana dispensaries. Don't sugarcoat it.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
Sorry, but I'm intimately connected to the California MMJ movement, both at the political level and on the ground.

There are at least several thousand MMJ dispensaries operating statewide at varying levels and the feds have only busted less than a half dozen in the past four months.

That's worthy of criticism, but in the big picture it's not very worrisome. Tens of thousands of Californians are obtaining their MMJ through these outlets and individuals are no longer being charged.

It's frankly preposterous to get overly concerned about federal intrusion on the marijuana market because they quite simply don't have the manpower or resources to bother at least 99% of marijuana users in either California or anywhere else.

===
As for your reference to Denver police arresting marijuana users on federal charges, I'd appreciate a cite supporting your assertion. It runs counter to what I've been told by my friends at SAFER and they are the ones who passed the law in Denver.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
Less than eight weeks ago in Denver at the Civic Center, over 3000 people assembled and smoked publicly while 80 Denver police officers stood by

http://www.saferchoice.org/content/view/866/38/

===
The DEA has stated repeatedly for at least the past ten years that they have absolutely no interest in either pursuing nor arresting individual marijuana users. It's a pragmatic approach on their part since they have about 6,000 agents domestically who are actively engaged in much bigger illicit drug trafficking intervention and there are upwards of 30 to 40 million Americans who use marijuana.
 

"Here we go again"
Joined
Jul 1, 2006
Messages
4,507
Tokens
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/15508443/detail.html


I was mistaken, arrests are actually up. The feds aren't doing the arrests themselves, they just force local departments to arrest marijuana smokers and if they don't meet the feds ridiculous arrest quota, they cut off all funding. Again, the voters in this country don't decide shit - at any level.

And nothing has changed in California either. You simply can't adequetly operate a medical-marijuana dispensary with no funding. They are held to a standard like no other establishment.
 

I'm from the government and I'm here to help
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
33,544
Tokens
nothing gets barman more excited than a thread about legalizing marijuana

since i have no idea what the going rate is for an ounce of pot what % of tax would that $50 be? Just wondering how it compares to the taxing of alcohol
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
SHK retorts: http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/15508443/detail.html


I was mistaken, arrests are actually up.

Bar: That's a news story from 15 months ago and I'm told by my friends at SaferChoice that there's been no further escalation.

SHK: The feds aren't doing the arrests themselves, they just force local departments to arrest marijuana smokers and if they don't meet the feds ridiculous arrest quota, they cut off all funding.

Bar: Barring a citation, you just made that part up out of thin air.

===

SHK: And nothing has changed in California either. You simply can't adequetly operate a medical-marijuana dispensary with no funding.

Bar: And yet 1000+ MMJ dispensaries are operating right this very moment as I type this post.

The federal government is quite simply incapable of either shutting down or notably impeding marijuana distribution within the USA. That's been a fact since 1970 and it becomes even less a problem with each passing day.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
Let's be straight.

There's plenty of reasons to legitimately be grumpy about the federal government attempts to impede peaceful cultivation and distribution of marijuana.

But exaggerating the reality on the ground in either California or anywhere else in the USA is a huge waste of energy and detracts from ongoing progress towards removing criminal laws against adult marijuana use, cultivation and/or commercial distribution.

This is a "war" that was lost by the feds the instant the CSA was passed into law in 1970. And they're not gaining any more ground in the future.
 

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
24,884
Tokens
nothing gets barman more excited than a thread about legalizing marijuana

Yeah he never merges these threads. Nimue spreads a lot of herb in this forum and it should all be packed in the same bowl. And then shared! :bong:
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
nothing gets barman more excited than a thread about legalizing marijuana

since i have no idea what the going rate is for an ounce of pot what % of tax would that $50 be? Just wondering how it compares to the taxing of alcohol

Well of course that's just proposed language at this moment. Such a flat tax would be wholly unfair if applied to all grades of pot.

But for the bulk of homegrown medicinal grade cannabis, the going rate ranges from $250-400 an ounce depending on who's dealing where and how much they need to set aside for potential legal hassles.

In a truly legal setting where dealers could operate in at least some form of open competition without fear of arrest, the price would likely plummet by at least 50%.

My friends in NoCal who grow medicinal grade tell me that the actual dollar outlay to produce a good pound is about $50 plus the cost of responsible oversight by a qualified gardener.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
Speaking for myself, if I could score good grade cannabis without fear of arrest in a legal, regulated market I'd have no complaint about paying 50% tax.

Now as most of us realize, excessive taxation on a legal product will stimulate illegal production and distribution. So we must hope that as marijuana becomes more legally accessible across the country that those involved in making such decisions exercise some prudential thinking.
 

"Here we go again"
Joined
Jul 1, 2006
Messages
4,507
Tokens
SHK retorts: http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/15508443/detail.html


I was mistaken, arrests are actually up.

Bar: That's a news story from 15 months ago and I'm told by my friends at SaferChoice that there's been no further escalation.

SHK: The feds aren't doing the arrests themselves, they just force local departments to arrest marijuana smokers and if they don't meet the feds ridiculous arrest quota, they cut off all funding.

Bar: Barring a citation, you just made that part up out of thin air.

===

SHK: And nothing has changed in California either. You simply can't adequetly operate a medical-marijuana dispensary with no funding.

Bar: And yet 1000+ MMJ dispensaries are operating right this very moment as I type this post.

The federal government is quite simply incapable of either shutting down or notably impeding marijuana distribution within the USA. That's been a fact since 1970 and it becomes even less a problem with each passing day.


I can't find any statistics from 2009, but there is no indication arrests have been halted. Yes the article was from 2008. However, the law was passed in 2005 which stated possesing under an ounce of marijuana in Denver was completely legal. Yet arrests went up in Denver for marijuana possesion after it was "legal" in the city of Denver, as the local officals prosecuted citizens under state and federal law. There has been no progress what-so-ever in denver, there has actually been a regression.

And you're trying to make a case that the local departments had no pressure from the state and federal government to enforce these ridiculous laws?

Yes there are numerous MMJ dispensaries in California right now, but they are still being raided by federal agents. Again, if you are defending the preposterous standards the feds and state are holding the medical dispensaries to, i'm not sure what to say.

As for the government stopping marijuana importion, of course the government is incapable of shutting down marijuana distribution. There goal isn't to stop the flow of drugs. It's fact the CIA imports the majority of cocaine into this country. There goal is to imprison the population through their ridiculous laws, and they are extremely successful.

In 1972 when Richard Nixon started the war on drugs the federal budget allocation was $101M. Going into fiscal year 2001 the federal budget allocation was $20B. Yet there were more drugs in the country in 2001, they were better quality, and they were less expensive then they were in 1972.:):):):):):):):)

And people sincerely think the goal is to stop the flow of drugs.

Barman, you have good intentions and it's good groups are out there fighting for marijuana rights. However, the fact remains Harry Anslinger outlawed marijuana by spreading blatant lies, and the government will make sure it will remain outlawed by engaging in deception.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
SHK: I can't find any statistics from 2009, but there is no indication arrests have been halted. Yes the article was from 2008. However, the law was passed in 2005 which stated possesing under an ounce of marijuana in Denver was completely legal. Yet arrests went up in Denver for marijuana possesion after it was "legal" in the city of Denver, as the local officals prosecuted citizens under state and federal law.

Bar: Aha...Now you're being accurate. Denver prosecutors are charging under Colorado state law, which is their right. They are not charging anyone using federal law, as you initially insisted.

Your initial entry into this thread was to complain that marijuana policies could not see significant change because "the feds won't allow it".

In fact, the feds are literally incapable of impeding continued progression in state and local marijuana policy changes, which is why they quite simply stay out of it.

====
SHK: And you're trying to make a case that the local departments had no pressure from the state and federal government to enforce these ridiculous laws?

Bar: I'm not making any case at all. I'm merely asking you to demonstrate evidence of such pressure being applied. When we wrote yesterday, I asked for evidence the feds were applying pressure and am not surprised you can't find any.

I'll modify my request to ask that you provide any kind of reasonable citation demonstrating that Colorado state officials are "putting pressure" on Denver to make marijuana arrests.

In reality, according to my colleagues in law enforcement (you may recall I work with people from both sides of this discussion), the only people being arrested for marijuana possession in Denver and probably about 90% of the USA are those foolish enough to just put their use and/or product right in the face of police. By far the most common way a marijuana possession arrest occurs is when someone is involved with either a traffic stop or involved with another criminal act and when police conduct a search, pot is found.

Those possession busts are not brought on by any outward pressure. They're brought about by people who are careless and clumsy. And not a one is made by federal agents.

-----
SHK: Yes there are numerous MMJ dispensaries in California right now, but they are still being raided by federal agents.

Bar: There have been less than a half dozen raids since February during which time well over 1000+ MMJ dispensaries are operating without interference.

SHK: Again, if you are defending the preposterous standards the feds and state are holding the medical dispensaries to, i'm not sure what to say.

Bar: The state law in California (SB 420) was passed to allow local jurisdictions to set their own standards for legal commercial distribution of MMJ. While I personally may not like all the standards set, I'm not a voting resident there. Those people who do vote there are now legally capable of setting the standards along with their local elected officials.

As for the 'standards the feds" are holding MMJ dispensaries to, AG Eric Holder is respecting President Obama's declaration that any dispensary complying with state and local restrictions will not be bothered by the feds.
That's plenty fine with me and with most all the people I personally know in California involved in the state-legal MMJ market.

===
SHK: As for the government stopping marijuana importion, of course the government is incapable of shutting down marijuana distribution.

Bar: Well see there. It only took you about a half dozen posts to finally acknowledge that your initial Reply of "The feds won't allow (changes to law)" was specious.

As I immediately noted and as you now agree above, it doesn't really matter what the federal government thinks about how states write their marijuana-related laws. They have the muscle to come in and fuck with a few folks (if Obama changes his stance), but for the remaining 99.9% of marijuana users in California, no one is really paying too much attention to what "the feds want".

====
SHK: Barman, you have good intentions and it's good groups are out there fighting for marijuana rights. However, the fact remains ..... the government will make sure it will remain outlawed by engaging in deception.

Bar: Thanks for the nice words and just recognize what I'm clearly stating above.

Regardless of whether the federal government maintains marijuana's illegal status, 99.9% of Americans who want to use or distribute marijuana will do so. And as states and local jurisdictions continue to change their laws, it will become even easier for people living in those places.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
barman any word on the bills in mass towards legalization?

I'm not aware of any bills in MA to legalize.

This past November by about a 2x1 margin, Massachusetts voters decriminalized adult possession of one ounce of marijuana. Offenders caught by police will be fined $100 and have their product confiscated.
 
Last edited:

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
I want to apologize to SHKid if my replies above came off as a bit too stern with regard to posture.

To reset a couple of the thoughts I expressed in more friendly terms, let me put it this way.

(A three to five minute read follows)

The "battle" with regard to reforming failed marijuana policies has evolved dramatically over the past 14 years.

And one of the most clear casualties during the past three to five years and with somewhat dramatic increase during the past five months is the boogeyman status the federal government has been able to uphold during the previous 35 years since the passage of the Controlled Substances Act in 1970.

And the foundation of their being able to uphold that status was - as SAYHEYKID aptly notes - their virtual monopoly on being the providers of information about marijuana and all that it entails in late 20th century America. When local, state or federal elected officals and policy makers were presented with proposals to modify marijuana laws (for better or worse) the first place they would turn was the "federal drug czar's office" and the National Institute of Health.

When the print, radio or television media wanted information about marijuana, they would turn to either these same federal offices or they would turn to guess who? Yep - local, state and federal elected officials who got their information from who? See the paragraph above.

And for a quarter of a century, this became an incestuous relationship, with state and local policy makers using media reports to support their belief in the "War on Drugs" - and the media basing their reports on the testimonies of these same state and local policy officials.

Tens of millions of Americans knew full well that policies were founded on "reefer madness" misinformation and outright fictions. But unfortunately, the only time they could really get much play was a few times a year and only via some public festival or college "awareness week" during which well-meaning hippy types in tie-dyed shirts and funny hats would declare, "The government is lying, man!" - replete with various Cheech & Chong style music and amused newscasters creating two and three minute "funny reports".

Then in the mid 1990s, something happened called the Internet. And along with that various smart people from all walks of life along with various well-funded people from all walks of life began to make connections.

And then the organization for which I worked almost nine years - The Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org - began to do carry out it's primary mission.

Beginning slowly in 1996 with a handful of articulate writers getting letters published in newspapers across the country, MAPinc began to provide interested people with a steady flow of drug policy related news and opinion clippings from around the nation. And the number of articulate writers grew to where by the year 2002 there were on a daily basis over a dozen letters to the editor being printed across the country....70, 80 per week....hundreds per month...thousands per year.

And the media began making contact with more than the tie-dyed hippy dudes. They began to talk to professors and scientists and doctors and attorneys. And each day via the internet, interested media could read those dozens of daily and hundreds of weekly articulate letters breaking down the lies of the federal government regarding marijuana.


When I first started working for MAPinc as a volunteer in 1999, it's fair to say that upwards of 80% of mainstream newspapers were openly supportive of existing marijuana laws; 50% or more expressed disdain towards the idea of legalizing marijuana for medical use; and maybe 20% would ever run editorials or OPEDs calling for one or more aspects of legitimate reform.

When I stepped away from my (then salaried) job with MAPinc this past January - over nine years later - those numbers were more like this.

80% of mainstream newspapers are openly supportive of decriminalizing and/or legalizing adult marijuana possession

95% are openly supportive of legalizing marijuana for medical use, while expressing a range of opinions on just how such legalization should be regulated

80% run some kind of editorial or OPED column promoting reform of marijuana laws several times throughout the year, with that frequency being higher in those states which are seeing legitimate proposals being presented at the legislative level.

In the year 2009 it is a very rare mainstream newspaper editorial board that calls for any kind of escalation or even significant perpetuation of marijuana Prohibition policies.

----
The reason I emphasize the above numbers is this.

Every significant arena of social reform in United States history has followed the same path

1) A group of citizens express a grievance with the government (local, state or federal).

2) If that grievance has sufficient merit and is delivered by sufficiently articulate and credible presenters, the mainstream media begins to provide news coverage. This news coverage is followed by Opinion coverage.

3) If the news and opinion coverage attracts sufficient sympathy from the community at large, more people begin to step up into #1 above and this then leads to an increase in #2, which leads to the media becoming more educated about the overall topic and then the media itself begins to join forces with those citizens demanding change. Thus leading us to:

4) Elected officials.

They begin to take notice of what's being said when the mainstream media voice increases in volume. They may well have ignored #1 and #2, but by the time the cycle #3 begins to pick up steam they are forced to confront the target topic head on.

If JoeCitizen asks them, "Change the policy/law", it's pretty easy to ignore.

But if the mainstream newspaper reporters, editorial boards and radio/TV producers begin to demand they explain their position, suddenly they are forced to give the topic proper attention.

Leading us back to #2, which is that if the grievance has sufficient merit and it's delivered by people and/or media who are articulate and influential, then the elected officals and policy makers finally move that direction.

The Womens' rights movement in the early 20th century; the general civil rights movement based on race in the 1950s-1980s, the gay rights movement of the 1980s-present.

All of these major social movements and associated legal and public policy change followed the 4 step course I describe above.


==
So, after almost 15 years of strong dedicated nationwide effort, the "drug policy reform" movement has successfully moved through #3 above and we're well into #4.

Thus, for those of us who have been intimately involved with that progression, when someone with very sincere and honest intentions - such as SAYHEYKID earlier in this thread - offers up the righteous grievances about how the federal government has impeded Americans' access to using marijuana, I owe an apology for shaking him a bit and saying, "It's all good. We're WAY past that. We're into Step4 above."

Now it's still important to continue educating both the media and the public at large about the origins of marijuana Prohibition and why it's bogus. But that work can be done by people with less vested interest in the process, such as college students and other adult citizens who can offer up a couple hours a week educating their friends and neighbors.

For those of us on the front line, we're busy with Step 4.

See, once we get into Step3, much less Step4, the "battle" with the feds is pretty much done. They can run whatever rap they want via their handful (literally...less than ten people) of "spokespeople" who gravely warn state and local officials that "Federal law states marijuana is ILLEGAL!!" and guess what?

The state and local officials go where for their information?

Yep...To the mainstream media reports. (Thus bringing Barman's lengthy late night essay almost full circle)

Ain't it great?

For 25, almost 30 years that was a bad thing for us.

But today, in the year 2009, it's a wonderful thing.

The handful (about two or three people from ONDCP and two or three people from DEA and maybe a couple of state or local "narcotics officers" or prosecutors) of "marijuana booga booga" doomsayers make their pitch.

And the editors, reporters, writers of mainstream media and radio/television look at each other. Then they consult the massive flow of free and articulate information available to them today in the year 2009.

And then they write in support of reforming and/or repealing existing laws.

And elected officials see that and begin to think, "you know, if I agreed to vote YES for medical marijuana or to decriminalize one ounce of pot for adults, I might not have to worry about being reelected because the top five newspapers in my state all agree with reform".

And the feds say, "Booga booga booga!!!"

And no one pays much attention.

And the feds even bust down a couple MMJ dispensaries and seize all the pot without making any arrests. And when the reporters call, they issue a press release that says, "booga booga booga!!"

And millions....tens of millions of Americans yawn. And just keep on growing, distributing and consuming marijuana.

And laws continue to change, making it even easier for those tens of millions to do it even more.

Win Win

Looking forward to seeing what California voters actually get onto their 2010 ballot.

And oh yeah, earlier this afternoon, the announcement came down that the funding needed to get a similar legalization proposal onto the 2012 Nevada ballot has been approved.

And the beat goes on.

d1g1td1g1t
 

New member
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
7,373
Tokens
Enjoyed the read and totally respect your work in ending the prohibition of Cannabis. I started following the various news/acitivist sites...Cannabis News, MAP, MPP, etc. well over a decade ago. It's great to see the progress being made.

I want to apologize to SHKid if my replies above came off as a bit too stern with regard to posture.

To reset a couple of the thoughts I expressed in more friendly terms, let me put it this way.

(A three to five minute read follows)

The "battle" with regard to reforming failed marijuana policies has evolved dramatically over the past 14 years.

And one of the most clear casualties during the past three to five years and with somewhat dramatic increase during the past five months is the boogeyman status the federal government has been able to uphold during the previous 35 years since the passage of the Controlled Substances Act in 1970.

And the foundation of their being able to uphold that status was - as SAYHEYKID aptly notes - their virtual monopoly on being the providers of information about marijuana and all that it entails in late 20th century America. When local, state or federal elected officals and policy makers were presented with proposals to modify marijuana laws (for better or worse) the first place they would turn was the "federal drug czar's office" and the National Institute of Health.

When the print, radio or television media wanted information about marijuana, they would turn to either these same federal offices or they would turn to guess who? Yep - local, state and federal elected officials who got their information from who? See the paragraph above.

And for a quarter of a century, this became an incestuous relationship, with state and local policy makers using media reports to support their belief in the "War on Drugs" - and the media basing their reports on the testimonies of these same state and local policy officials.

Tens of millions of Americans knew full well that policies were founded on "reefer madness" misinformation and outright fictions. But unfortunately, the only time they could really get much play was a few times a year and only via some public festival or college "awareness week" during which well-meaning hippy types in tie-dyed shirts and funny hats would declare, "The government is lying, man!" - replete with various Cheech & Chong style music and amused newscasters creating two and three minute "funny reports".

Then in the mid 1990s, something happened called the Internet. And along with that various smart people from all walks of life along with various well-funded people from all walks of life began to make connections.

And then the organization for which I worked almost nine years - The Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org - began to do carry out it's primary mission.

Beginning slowly in 1996 with a handful of articulate writers getting letters published in newspapers across the country, MAPinc began to provide interested people with a steady flow of drug policy related news and opinion clippings from around the nation. And the number of articulate writers grew to where by the year 2002 there were on a daily basis over a dozen letters to the editor being printed across the country....70, 80 per week....hundreds per month...thousands per year.

And the media began making contact with more than the tie-dyed hippy dudes. They began to talk to professors and scientists and doctors and attorneys. And each day via the internet, interested media could read those dozens of daily and hundreds of weekly articulate letters breaking down the lies of the federal government regarding marijuana.


When I first started working for MAPinc as a volunteer in 1999, it's fair to say that upwards of 80% of mainstream newspapers were openly supportive of existing marijuana laws; 50% or more expressed disdain towards the idea of legalizing marijuana for medical use; and maybe 20% would ever run editorials or OPEDs calling for one or more aspects of legitimate reform.

When I stepped away from my (then salaried) job with MAPinc this past January - over nine years later - those numbers were more like this.

80% of mainstream newspapers are openly supportive of decriminalizing and/or legalizing adult marijuana possession

95% are openly supportive of legalizing marijuana for medical use, while expressing a range of opinions on just how such legalization should be regulated

80% run some kind of editorial or OPED column promoting reform of marijuana laws several times throughout the year, with that frequency being higher in those states which are seeing legitimate proposals being presented at the legislative level.

In the year 2009 it is a very rare mainstream newspaper editorial board that calls for any kind of escalation or even significant perpetuation of marijuana Prohibition policies.

----
The reason I emphasize the above numbers is this.

Every significant arena of social reform in United States history has followed the same path

1) A group of citizens express a grievance with the government (local, state or federal).

2) If that grievance has sufficient merit and is delivered by sufficiently articulate and credible presenters, the mainstream media begins to provide news coverage. This news coverage is followed by Opinion coverage.

3) If the news and opinion coverage attracts sufficient sympathy from the community at large, more people begin to step up into #1 above and this then leads to an increase in #2, which leads to the media becoming more educated about the overall topic and then the media itself begins to join forces with those citizens demanding change. Thus leading us to:

4) Elected officials.

They begin to take notice of what's being said when the mainstream media voice increases in volume. They may well have ignored #1 and #2, but by the time the cycle #3 begins to pick up steam they are forced to confront the target topic head on.

If JoeCitizen asks them, "Change the policy/law", it's pretty easy to ignore.

But if the mainstream newspaper reporters, editorial boards and radio/TV producers begin to demand they explain their position, suddenly they are forced to give the topic proper attention.

Leading us back to #2, which is that if the grievance has sufficient merit and it's delivered by people and/or media who are articulate and influential, then the elected officals and policy makers finally move that direction.

The Womens' rights movement in the early 20th century; the general civil rights movement based on race in the 1950s-1980s, the gay rights movement of the 1980s-present.

All of these major social movements and associated legal and public policy change followed the 4 step course I describe above.


==
So, after almost 15 years of strong dedicated nationwide effort, the "drug policy reform" movement has successfully moved through #3 above and we're well into #4.

Thus, for those of us who have been intimately involved with that progression, when someone with very sincere and honest intentions - such as SAYHEYKID earlier in this thread - offers up the righteous grievances about how the federal government has impeded Americans' access to using marijuana, I owe an apology for shaking him a bit and saying, "It's all good. We're WAY past that. We're into Step4 above."

Now it's still important to continue educating both the media and the public at large about the origins of marijuana Prohibition and why it's bogus. But that work can be done by people with less vested interest in the process, such as college students and other adult citizens who can offer up a couple hours a week educating their friends and neighbors.

For those of us on the front line, we're busy with Step 4.

See, once we get into Step3, much less Step4, the "battle" with the feds is pretty much done. They can run whatever rap they want via their handful (literally...less than ten people) of "spokespeople" who gravely warn state and local officials that "Federal law states marijuana is ILLEGAL!!" and guess what?

The state and local officials go where for their information?

Yep...To the mainstream media reports. (Thus bringing Barman's lengthy late night essay almost full circle)

Ain't it great?

For 25, almost 30 years that was a bad thing for us.

But today, in the year 2009, it's a wonderful thing.

The handful (about two or three people from ONDCP and two or three people from DEA and maybe a couple of state or local "narcotics officers" or prosecutors) of "marijuana booga booga" doomsayers make their pitch.

And the editors, reporters, writers of mainstream media and radio/television look at each other. Then they consult the massive flow of free and articulate information available to them today in the year 2009.

And then they write in support of reforming and/or repealing existing laws.

And elected officials see that and begin to think, "you know, if I agreed to vote YES for medical marijuana or to decriminalize one ounce of pot for adults, I might not have to worry about being reelected because the top five newspapers in my state all agree with reform".

And the feds say, "Booga booga booga!!!"

And no one pays much attention.

And the feds even bust down a couple MMJ dispensaries and seize all the pot without making any arrests. And when the reporters call, they issue a press release that says, "booga booga booga!!"

And millions....tens of millions of Americans yawn. And just keep on growing, distributing and consuming marijuana.

And laws continue to change, making it even easier for those tens of millions to do it even more.

Win Win

Looking forward to seeing what California voters actually get onto their 2010 ballot.

And oh yeah, earlier this afternoon, the announcement came down that the funding needed to get a similar legalization proposal onto the 2012 Nevada ballot has been approved.

And the beat goes on.

d1g1td1g1t
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,982
Messages
13,575,733
Members
100,889
Latest member
junkerb
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com