cannabisnews.com: For Marijuana, a Second Wave of Votes to Legalize
function share_this(num) {
 tit=encodeURIComponent('For Marijuana, a Second Wave of Votes to Legalize');
 url=encodeURIComponent('http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/28/thread28333.shtml');
 site = new Array(5);
 site[0]='http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[1]='http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit.php?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[2]='http://digg.com/submit?topic=political_opinion&media=video&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[3]='http://reddit.com/submit?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[4]='http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&noui&jump=close&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 window.open(site[num],'sharer','toolbar=0,status=0,width=620,height=500');
 return false;
}






For Marijuana, a Second Wave of Votes to Legalize
Posted by CN Staff on October 28, 2014 at 19:49:12 PT
By Kirk Johnson
Source: New York Times
Keitzer, Ore. -- Two years after voters in Colorado and Washington State broke the ice as the first states to legalize sales of recreational marijuana to adults, residents of Oregon, Alaska and Washington, D.C., will vote next week on ballot measures patterned on those of the two pioneers. People on both sides of the issue say these initiatives could determine whether there will be a national tide of legalization.A changing political landscape has weakened anti-marijuana efforts. As the libertarian movement in the Republican Party has gained force, with leaders like Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, supporting decriminalization of marijuana and others going even further, an anchor of the conservative opposition to legalization has eroded.
And Democrats have found that supporting legalization — once an invitation to be labeled soft on crime — no longer carries the risk it once did, as public discussion of prison overcrowding and law enforcement budgets has reframed the issue.National groups that have long advocated legalization have provided labor and money, along with help from a legal marijuana industry that did not exist in 2012. The old antidrug coalition has struggled to find traction and money. Supporters of legalization have outdone opponents’ fund-raising here in Oregon by more than 25 to 1, and in Alaska by about 9 to 1.“The support coalition is definitely broader, and the opposition has splintered,” said Corey Cook, an associate professor of politics at the University of San Francisco who follows the marijuana debate.The contrast between the pro- and anti-legalization forces was apparent on a recent day in Oregon. In downtown Portland, scruffy hipsters with clipboards buttonholed passers-by, registering voters and urging them to vote yes on Measure 91, while political consultants put the final touches on a $2 million ad barrage.Nearby, opponents organized one of their major events in Keizer, a suburb of Salem, the state capital. Titled “Marijuana and Our Youth,” the session included two hours of PowerPoints and passionate denunciations of the drug. But no one even mentioned Measure 91: Audience participants and organizers, many of them from government-funded nonprofit groups involved in drug treatment services, were afraid of violating laws that ban politicking with public money.Opponents were, by their own admission, late in forming a united organization, and their campaign had only about $10,000 for advertising, with spots running on two Portland radio stations starting last weekend.“They’ve done a pretty good job of shutting everybody up,” said Joshua K. Marquis, the district attorney in Clatsop County and an opponent of legalization, referring to the pro-91 forces.The pro-legalization campaigns in Oregon and Alaska are financed largely by national organizations. In Alaska, 84 percent of the $867,000 raised by legalization proponents at Yes on Ballot Measure 2 has come from the Marijuana Policy Project, a group based in Washington, D.C., with an advisory board that includes actors, musicians and politicians, including Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party candidate for president in 2012. Opponents to legalization in Alaska have raised only $97,000.In Oregon, the Drug Policy Alliance, based in New York and backed by the billionaire investor George Soros, has led the charge, contributing at least $780,000 this year, according to state records, making up about 35 percent of the cash raised by the main committee supporting legalization.Marijuana-related businesses or investors in Colorado, Washington and California have contributed at least $60,000. Contributors included O.penVAPE, a company based in Denver that sells products for consuming concentrates like hash oil; Privateer Holdings, a marijuana investment firm in Seattle; and Vicente Sederberg, which calls itself “The Marijuana Law Firm.”There has been some well-funded opposition to legalization, especially in Florida, where voters will decide whether to become the first state in the South to allow marijuana for certain medical uses. There, Sheldon G. Adelson, a casino executive from Las Vegas, has contributed $5 million to opponents of medical marijuana, about 86 percent of the total raised by the main committee fighting the legislation.But in Oregon, there has been “no sugar daddy,” as Mr. Marquis, the county prosecutor, put it. Opponents have raised only about $179,000.Initiative 71 in Washington, D.C., would allow residents to possess up to two ounces of marijuana for personal use and grow up to six cannabis plants at home. Measure 91 in Oregon would allow possession by adults of up to eight ounces of marijuana and four plants. Ballot Measure 2 in Alaska would allow adult possession of one ounce and six plants.Supporters of legalization in Oregon and Alaska said that money was crucial to overcoming what they say was years of incorrect information and distortion by law enforcement and antidrug groups about marijuana’s risks.“The opposition made good traction for 50 years, and it was built around locking people up. A massive industry was built around it,” said Richard Branson, the entrepreneur who founded Virgin Group and a member of the Drug Policy Alliance’s international honorary board.Opponents said they were facing, for the first time, an emerging industrial complex.“This is not about independent Alaskans smoking marijuana in their homes, but a commercialization and industrialization of an industry,” said Charles Fedullo, a spokesman for Big Marijuana Big Mistake, which opposes Ballot Measure 2 in Alaska.Changes required for the meeting about marijuana and youth here in Keizer, opponents of legalization say, offers a case study in the tough new tactics of pro-legalization groups.A few weeks before the “Marijuana and Our Youth” meeting, legalization supporters pointed out to federal and state authorities that a small drug treatment center funded by government grants was sponsoring a tour of the state by Kevin A. Sabet, a co-founder of a national anti-legalization group, Smart Approaches to Marijuana. They reminded all parties that federal and state laws prohibited the use of public funds to influence elections.The State of Oregon agreed and issued a stern warning that any group receiving public money — a list that included 70 counties, tribes, schools and nonprofit agencies that provide drug treatment or substance-abuse prevention programs — had best tread carefully.The result was a sudden silence in the antidrug contingent and a muted meeting here in Keizer. Even though private funds were substituted to avoid the appearance of impropriety, talk of Measure 91, organizers said, was taken off the table out of concern for jobs and future government grants. A central constituency in the opposition, heavy on health care professionals, was stifled.Both sides said the new terrain offered a glimpse toward the next wave of states, notably California, where supporters are gearing up for a vote in 2016. But there are strange historical echoes, too. Alaska and Oregon were both pioneers of marijuana law in the 1970s. Oregon’s Legislature debated full legalization in 1973 and ended up passing the nation’s first law decriminalizing possession of small amounts. Alaska’s Supreme Court held in 1975 that possession of marijuana in one’s home was protected by constitutional privacy law.Whether the antidrug coalition of the past is dead or just sleeping, both sides agree that the old arguments no longer work.“Today’s parents are yesterday’s children who were smoking marijuana and have personal experience, and, therefore, the kind of advertisement which shows fried eggs doesn’t really cut it with them,” Mr. Soros said in an interview this year. He was referring to an antidrug television campaign that showed a sizzling egg in a pan and the tagline, “This is your brain on drugs.”But the pressure is also on proponents, they say, not to fall short, because every new state is a kind of test case.“If we win, I think it shows that public opinion has decisively changed — we’ve won in two election cycles,” said Peter Zuckerman, a spokesman for New Approach Oregon, the main group supporting legalization. “If we lose, I think it becomes much harder,” he said. “We have to maintain the momentum.”Professor Sabet, of the department of psychiatry in the College of Medicine at the University of Florida, founded his anti-legalization group with Patrick J. Kennedy, a former Democratic congressman from Rhode Island. He said an interview that on the surface, the fight against legalization probably looks unwinnable here.“It looks bad — I want to be on the other team,” he said, laughing. Turning serious, Professor Sabet said that experiences in Washington and Colorado were exposing flaws in legal marijuana — from greater exposure to young people to questions of highway safety — that he thinks will turn off many voters, even though opponents of the ballot measures lack the money to shout their message.“Legalization in practice has been the biggest enemy of legalization,” he said.Serge Kovaleski contributed reporting from New York. Source: New York Times (NY)Author: Kirk JohnsonPublished: October 28, 2014Copyright: 2014 The New York Times CompanyContact: letters nytimes.comWebsite: http://www.nytimes.com/URL: http://drugsense.org/url/ak9R9RsnCannabisNews  -- Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help 
     
     
     
     




Comment #10 posted by Garry Minor on October 30, 2014 at 14:27:06 PT:
#4 MikeEEEEE
"I wonder whether the bible belt states will ever get it. It does not seem likely. Perhaps we should tell them it was legal in the time of Jesus."Ha! Maybe WE should tell them that there are 250 shekels of Kaneh Bosm, Cannabis in the Holy Oil, Chrism that God instructed Moses to prepare for anointing His priests, kings, prophets, and of course, His Anointed Ones, Christians! The title Christ/Messiah means literally, covered in oil, Anointed!
Maybe if they were made known that they are literally and Biblically "antichrist" they might change their ways? 1John 2:18-29The True Christ is a Healer and Revealer, curing the cancers of the world!Their jesus is an ignorant deceiver that creates them!Gospel of PhilipThe chrism is superior to baptism, for it is from the word "Chrism" that we have been called "Christians," certainly not because of the word "baptism". And it is because of the chrism that "the Christ" has his name. For the Father anointed the Son, and the Son anointed the apostles, and the apostles anointed us. He who has been anointed possesses everything. He possesses the resurrection, the light, the cross, the Holy Spirit. The Father gave him this in the bridal chamber; he merely accepted (the gift). The Father was in the Son and the Son in the Father. This is the Kingdom of Heaven.Ignorance is the mother of all evil. Ignorance will result in death, because those that come from ignorance neither were nor are nor shall be. The Word said, "If you know the truth, the truth will make you free" (Jn 8:32). Ignorance is a slave. Knowledge is freedom. If we know the truth, we shall find the fruits of the truth within us. If we are joined to it, it will bring our fulfillment.http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gop.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by Sam Adams on October 29, 2014 at 19:14:55 PT
Vermont
Universer - Vermont does not have the referendum process. However, they are in the running for 1st state to legalize by state legislature.My money would be on New Hampshire or Rhode Island before Vermont though.I think whatever state does it first will be a border state with one that's legalized. They won't like seeing their tax dollars travelling over the border to govt. crooks next door.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by Sam Adams on October 29, 2014 at 19:12:23 PT
NY Times admitting truth
If I'm not mistaken, this is the NY Times admitting that they're a conservative newspaper - since they vigorously opposed MJ reform for the last 80 years, up until a few months ago...>>>A changing political landscape has weakened anti-marijuana efforts. As the libertarian movement in the Republican Party has gained force, with leaders like Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, supporting decriminalization of marijuana and others going even further, an anchor of the conservative opposition to legalization has eroded. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by Oleg the Tumor on October 29, 2014 at 09:49:31 PT
HE'S GOT IT BASS ACKWARDS!
This is not about independent Alaskans smoking marijuana in their homes, but a commercialization and industrialization of an industry,” said Charles Fedullo, a spokesman for Big Marijuana Big Mistake, which opposes Ballot Measure 2 in Alaska.The commercialization and industrialization referred to by this paid mouthpiece actually started in 1913 with creation of the Federal Reserve.At one time in our history, a farmer could actually pay his taxes in hemp.Bankers do not like this for obvious reasons (it is rather difficult to make change and hemp doesn't easily fit into the cash drawer).Nope, bankers want you to be in debt. They want you to think that there is value in their word when there is none.This IS about the right of citizens to smoke in their home. And most other places as well.WE NEED THE JOBS NOW!FREE THE PRISONER OF SCHEDULE ONE!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by The GCW on October 29, 2014 at 05:12:25 PT
Exposed again.
"But no one even mentioned Measure 91: Audience participants and organizers, many of them from government-funded nonprofit groups involved in drug treatment services, were afraid of violating laws that ban politicking with public money."-0-Cannabis prohibitionists, in many cases, know they leach money from government for their existence. That paragraph reinforces that fact. It's not about right and wrong, it's about affording their rock n roll life style, even if it means caging their neighbors young adults for using a relatively safe God-given plant.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by Universer on October 28, 2014 at 21:40:00 PT
Reason no. 63,327 to regulate cannabis:
I'm not politically or socially conservative, but I am environmentally. And the illegality of cannabis, and the toughness of border protection, has driven uncaring cartels into our national forests where they decimate our nation's natural beauty with tree-clearing, chemical-infested, water-robbing, wildlife-poisoning grows. One ought, like the iconic Native American, weep.We need cannabis, and it needs to grow. The Sierra Nevadas, or the Great Smokies, is not the place for that.Here's an Oregonian, former U.S. Forest Service firefighter, making that excellent argument.http://www.capitalpress.com/Opinion/Columns/20141028/decriminalizing-marijuana-would-protect-national-forests
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by MikeEEEEE on October 28, 2014 at 21:34:23 PT
Universer
Thank you.I wonder whether the bible belt states will ever get it.
It does not seem likely. Perhaps we should tell them it was legal in the time of Jesus.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by Universer on October 28, 2014 at 21:23:33 PT
A pleasant little read.
How about a full-throated endorsement of Alaska's cannabis legalization referendum from one of that state's past attorneys general.http://www.adn.com/article/20141018/john-havelock-marijuana-prohibition-wasteful-failure
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Universer on October 28, 2014 at 21:17:42 PT
MikeEEEEE
There actually is a fairly good idea as to which states will possibly (plausibly) hold referenda for some variety of cannabis legalization in 2016.Those possible (plausible) states include, but are not limited to, California, Nevada, Arizona, Massachusetts, New Mexico, Maine and Vermont. (If I am wrong in thinking that all those states are able to hold referenda, someone correct me.)That's not to suggest that every single one of those states will have a referendum to legalize. It could be less, or more, or different. But from my studious readings of way too much news and editorials, those are the ones that come to mind when posed the question, "Who's next?"
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by MikeEEEEE on October 28, 2014 at 21:10:02 PT
Next
Which states will be included in the next election, any ideas?
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment