I'm predicting the federal decriminalization of marijuana this year and here's why

[cellardoor]

I posted this on /r/trees as well so if you find it interesting or want to see some discussion about it on there please give me upvotes for visibility (t's a self post). So what does FC think?

http://www.reddit.com/r/trees/comments/1a5p12/im_predicting_the_federal_decriminalization_of/

This is a long shot but if it's true I'm Nate Silver.



Holder and Obama have both said their position on the legalization of cannabis in Colorado and Washington would come "relatively soon" and nobody really knows what that could mean.

Well today Nancy Pelosi came out and when asked about Colorado and Washington said: "To answer your question, what is my position regarding the states that have medical marijuana or recreational marijuana as the law of their states: I think that has to be respected. I think tax and regulate."

Now it's one thing when a rouge congressman drafts a medical marijuana bill that dies in committee but this is the minority leader, she's in the house leadership and would not be likely to go against a position taken by the party or the white house.

So here's what I think (fingers crossed): Obama and Holder are drafting policy (probably a memo or executive order as opposed to a bill) to either completely or effectively decriminalize marijuana at the federal level, or at least reschedule it as a less dangerous drug with potential medical applications.

Unfortunately many states (including Florida where a lot of us are) will still have state laws prohibiting cannabis but the move would still be absolutely massive for the movement as a whole. From what I can see it would be a lot more politically effective for the white house to make medical marijuana and marijuana in general a state-by-state issue. We all know that can only last so long though before interstate commerce will become an issue but I don't think this administration will have to tackle those challenges just yet.

One cavet though, Pelosi is a representative from California and this isn't the first time she's come out in support of state sovereignty in the case of medical marijuana laws. This looks to me to be the least apprehensive she's ever been about defending it though and coupled with the behavior of the executive branch I think all things are pointing to this time being different, also the support from Pelosi means that whatever policy we do get "relatively soon" will likely not be more strict. Also the time going into the policy makes me think it's a break from the status quo, it wouldn't require deliberation for the white house to point to McCulloch v. Maryland and shut down the entire legal marijuana industry.

tl;dr: Support from congressional leaders for marijuana might force the hand of the executive branch.

One last caveat kitties: Im a college sophomore in political science so while I like to think I have more of a grasp on these thing than most people I'm aware that I could be wrong and I don't know everything.

EDIT: When I say decriminalization in the title I mean effective decriminalization, the constitutional job of the executive branch is to enforce the law and the justice department can simply stop prosecuting minor marijuana offenses in mmj states which is what I believe will happen here. Congress isn't going to pass a thing, at least not for a while, the executive branch can effectively decriminalize marijuana at the federal level at any time. In fact on second thought they can just tell the DEA to stop trying to catch people for marijuana offenses in mmj states which would be even better. This is NOT full blown legalization and marijuana would still be illegal to sell and produce at the federal level although I doubt the justice department will go after dispensaries in compliance with state laws if something like this happened. It would also be just as illegal as it is now in non-mmj states.

Again for clarity: I'm not talking about full scale legalization.

 

[OO]

It wouldn't be better for the executive branch to tell the DEA jack squat, that road has been traveled, the DEA doesn't give a damn.

I'm not done being pissed until the incentive to seize property is removed. LEO's should not be trying to find ways to steal the money of anyone, seizure laws are complete crap.

That being said if decriminalization of cannabis does happen (which would be a huge surprise), I would be slightly happier, which schedule do you think it should be?

 

[Chill Dude]

I posted this on /r/trees as well so if you find it interesting or want to see some discussion about it on there please give me upvotes for visibility (t's a self post). So what does FC think?

http://www.reddit.com/r/trees/comments/1a5p12/im_predicting_the_federal_decriminalization_of/

Really, you're a Sophmore in college and you don't know everything LOL... Just joking....

I tend to agree with a lot of your points. I definitely think that if tha administration was going to take a hard stance on this issue, they would have done it within a month of the election, so as not to get people too exited about the possibility of state legalization. That said, I don't think there's a chance in hell that the Obama administration will use an executive order to Legalize weed at the Federal level. However, I do agree with you that there is a chance that weed will ultimately be reclassified as something other than a Schedule 1 drug,mperhaps a schedule 3 or better. Although, that would have to be voted on in congress IMO. I believe the most liklely scenario would be the administration lets Washington and Colorado proceed with legalization and tax and regulate. However, they would have to Tweak some existing Federal Laws that would be in conflict with allowing states to tax weed. I think Obama will express his view that states should have the right to make their own rules regarding medical or recreational use of weed. Let's just hope Wasington and Colorado do a good job implementing their laws so problems willbe minimal. As you know, if the administration allows this, they can also easily shut everything down if it turns into mess and creates too many problems. Just my opinion...

Good Thread!!

Edit: cellar door, you're right. I misread and thought you we're talking about full federal legalization.....

In response to your edit.... I totally agree that decriminalization will happen in all MMJ states. As you stated, the executive branch can unilaterally decriminalize marijuana at the Federal level if they want to. However, I disagree with you that congress won't pass legislation to reclassify weed from a schedule 1 drug to a schedule 3 or 4 drug. Not right now, but within the next couple years. My reasoning is as follows:

If the administration decides to let Wasington and Colorado move forward with legalization, there will obviously be a conflict between state and local law. That in turn, will put pressure on congress to reclassify weed. I mean, how can you give states the right to legalize MJ, and at the same time say its a dangerous schedule 1 drug just like heroin? That makes no sense as one of the roles of government is to protect the health and welfare of its citizens, at least to a certain degree.

So , would there be enough votes in congress to get this passed? I don't know, maybe....you see this is not just a liberal cause. Although I'm a liberal that supports legalization of weed there is some support from both democrats and republicans.For example, on the democratic side you have Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer among many others. However, on the conservative side you have Rand Paul( libertarian), even Tea party types like Paul Ryan. The conservative movement is all for personal freedom, giving more power to the states, and as the Tea Party says " keep the Federal Government off our backs". Moreover, many conservatives are all for taxing and regulating weed because it would give the states additional revenues. I believe, that failed war on drugs, along with the evolving positions of members of congress and the fact that recent polls show a strong shift in favor of legalization will bode well for congressional action. That said, it won't be easy, but I think it's possible, in the near future, for congress to pass legislation to reclassify weed.

 

[1_gr8_underdog]

I ran across this and thought here might be a good place to put it? http://www.kvue.com/news/state/Texa...e-for-small-marijuana-offenses-197639501.html

 

[cellardoor]

I ran across this and thought here might be a good place to put it? http://www.kvue.com/news/state/Texa...e-for-small-marijuana-offenses-197639501.html

If this passes it's the end of criminalized cannabis, I'm assuming once something socially liberal passes in Texas it's like a free pass for every other state to do it. I'm half kidding, Texas doesn't have that much sway, but when public opinion is at a point where a bill like this could pass in Texas of all states (which I don't think it will for now) we will definitely be living in a better world.

 

[Frederick McGuire]

...I mean, how can you give states the right to legalize MJ, and at the same time say its a dangerous schedule 1 drug just like heroin? That makes no sense as one of the roles of government is to protect the health and welfare of its citizens, at least to a certain degree.

You're expecting what the government does to make sense?

 

[Gunky]

I think it is quite possible that sometime during the remainder of Obama's term in office, Justice and DEA will step back from enforcement in states with medical and recreational cannabis. It might not be till Holder leaves office, though. Here's a guy who has been busting legal dispensaries in California and Montana. People are wasting away in jail. And now he suddenly steps up and says oops? Possibly Holder has to go first.

 

[ShipDit]

It seems like legalizing marijuana would be a no brainer,but here we are.
I don't trust ANY politician to do the right thing reguardless of public opinion. Even though numerous national polls put the figure somewhere around 51-55% in favor of at least MMJ. We are supposed be a country ruled "By the people,for the people",but Washington ignores that fact. The only thing the greed-heads running the show care about is money. If we can show them how much can be made by taxing and regulating pot like booze,then things will change.
Bottom line,it's up to us. We need to show that states like Washington and Colorado profit from weed sales while lowering crime rates. Any way you look at it it's up to US. We The People vs. the federal Govt.
That leaves one question to be answered...will you fight?

 

[t-dub]

If we can show them how much can be made by taxing and regulating pot like booze,then things will change.

Not necessarily. Its not how much $$$ can be made but who gets to make it. Anheuser-Busch is one of the largest lobbying groups against legal cannabis . . .

 

[ShipDit]

Not necessarily. Its not how much $$$ can be made but who gets to make it. Anheuser-Busch is one of the largest lobbying groups against legal cannabis . . .

Exactly right bro. To many people stand to loose lots of $ if weed is legalized.
Gonna be a tough fight,but I've got nothing better to do.

 

[Gunky]

The genie is clearly out of the bottle and the end is inevitable, especially with these latest elections in WA and CO. Meanwhile how many more people are gonna get busted and spend time in jail over something a majority don't think is a problem?

 

[ShipDit]

Yeah it's fucked up,no doubt about it.
These fuckers can't even keep drugs out of prison,how do they think they can outlaw something I grow in my basement and smoke in my living room?
If we stand together we can win this fight. If you live in a MMJ state please don't forget your brothers and sisters still being jailed for doing the same thing you do every day. Stand with us because as long as ANYBODY has to live in fear because they like/need weed we will never be completely free.
Remner that WE ARE THE PEOPLE,and they can't ignore the majority for ever.

 

[Frederick McGuire]

Just to play devils advocate for a bit, it's not necessarily the govts job to simply bow to the will of the people on a given issue.

(Disclaimer, this is coming from an Australian, I'm gonna be going from the premise that the US and Australian governmental role is significantly similar. Plus I watch the daily show and Colbert report regularly enough, so I get to see plenty of batshit crazy republicans, with less but still just as crazy democrats )

There are things where public opinion frankly is irrelevant, since the public may be (un/mis)informed.
Some areas that spring to mind are ones that are particularly religious problems, but not necessarily societal problems, like abortion and homosexual marriage, (but I'm not trying to point the finger at religion, they are just examples that came to mind quickly)

(This is a new thought of mine, so forgive me if its not exactly thought through) for me, saying a majority of the public want it legal, as an argument for legalization, is just as weak as saying that a majority want it illegal, as an argument for criminalisation.

Who cares what the public opinion is, what are the facts, how should the situation be handled according to those facts, and if this leads to action that is contrary to public opinion, how can we better educate the public on the facts?

In the case of marijuana, there is mounting evidence that it is a very useful medical intervention, and it has quite significantly less harm potential than other legal drugs.
Those are reasons backed by evidence, not simply the whims of a populace (whether I agree with those whims or not)
(yeah, that's right 4 cents )

 

[ShipDit]

Good points Fred,we could debate this all night...and still not solve anything.
Our Govt is supposed to be "By the people,for the people". I totally agree that the people don't/can't know everything.
It's their job to make the will of the people the law of the land. But our Govt is so big,so convoluted and so unwilling to change it's ways that the voices get lost or flat out ignored. Sometimes change comes naturally,and some times it must be forced. A little revolution now and then is a good thing.
I don't know how to change our situation,it's just to complicated to think someone can throw a switch and make it all better.
So how long have you been a cop? Are you paid by the hour to troll the forums?
BWAAHAHAHA....! GOTCHA!!
Sorry for calling you a cop,that's pretty low of me,but in my defense it seemed really funny when I was typing.
It's good to debate this stuff with people smart enough to offer a different point of view. Then after the debate we can sit back and Vape a bowl! Good stuff Fred,good stuff!

 

[Frederick McGuire]

the closest I've come to being a cop is doing legal studies at high school (fun fact, I haven't checked this, but I've been told that my having done legal studies in high school makes me too qualified to be on a jury here... Cuz I'm not technically a regular member of the public, I've had some legal training... I don't know if that deserves a or a )

I get where you're coming from in regards to the "by the people for the people" stuff, I guess my point is that it doesn't necessarily lead to the "right" outcome all the time...
For me, that may be a statutory/constitutional/common law argument, but I'm looking for the scientific argument?

 

[OO]

the closest I've come to being a cop is doing legal studies at high school (fun fact, I haven't checked this, but I've been told that my having done legal studies in high school makes me too qualified to be on a jury here... Cuz I'm not technically a regular member of the public, I've had some legal training... I don't know if that deserves a or a )

If you're not laughing, you're crying.

Take a close look at the supreme court decision that determined that jurors are not entitled to the knowledge of their right to nullify and that to notify them is a jailable offense.

Or just do a search of Juror Nullification.

 

[ShipDit]

the closest I've come to being a cop is doing legal studies at high school (fun fact, I haven't checked this, but I've been told that my having done legal studies in high school makes me too qualified to be on a jury here... Cuz I'm not technically a regular member of the public, I've had some legal training... I don't know if that deserves a or a )

I get where you're coming from in regards to the "by the people for the people" stuff, I guess my point is that it doesn't necessarily lead to the "right" outcome all the time...
For me, that may be a statutory/constitutional/common law argument, but I'm looking for the scientific argument?

Right on brother! Please don't send the phone spiders,I hate those bastards.

 

[Crohnie]

Although I believe it will happen eventually, federal decriminalization or rescheduling aren't going to happen any time soon. I think that within the next 5 years, the number of states with medical and recreational laws will increase to the point that the Feds won't have the resources to enforce federal law. I predict a sort of "de facto" federal decriminalization will take place then.

I believe that In the next 10-20 years, so many states will have passed medical and recreational laws that the Federal law will almost become irrelevant. At that point, I think, official federal decriminalization, and POSSIBLY legalization will occur. I know that time scale is depressing, but I believe it's realistic.

 

[ShipDit]

Something to look forward to for sure.
Sometimes I think back 10-15 years. Back then MMJ states didn't exist and the idea that 2 states would defy federal law and legalize it for recreational use was unthinkable. I think it'll shake out like this...many more states will either legalize rec. use or allow MMJ. Some states will oppose ANY marijuana laws and stay with prohibition as it is. I think that's the way to go. That way both groups will have a choice of where to live. Don't like weed and want to live somewhere that don't allow it in any way?, there will be states that remain "dry". Want to use weed on a recreational basis? There will be states for you too! Somewhere in-between? Don't like rec. use but want to allow MMJ for the sick folks who need it? There will be states for them as well.
It's a big Goddamn country,plenty of room for all of us.
That's my dream anyway. Time will tell. In the meantime if things remain the way they are now I will be SERIOUSLY thinking of moving to Colorado or Washington. There are 2 states that will me to live as I choose as far as marijuana is concerned,and that's pretty cool in my book.
There is room for all of us,no matter what your views on weed are. Time to start "The Great Re-location Migration". They can live happily ever after and so can we. Two different groups can live in the same country peacefully. I hope.

 

[balleronabudget]

I love the idea of legalization for legitimate medical reasons. I have nothing against that idea. The only
I worry about if it becomes legal for recreational use. It will turn into the tobacco market and have dangerous chemicals added to it to make it more addictive like nicotine.

 

[OO]

I love the idea of legalization for legitimate medical reasons. I have nothing against that idea. The only
I worry about if it becomes legal for recreational use. It will turn into the tobacco market and have dangerous chemicals added to it to make it more addictive like nicotine.

I don't know how to interpret this. I'm not sure if you think nicotine is added to tobacco, or if you are worried that nicotine would be added to cannabis.

Honestly, the market will cater to what people want, and if people want a cannabis/tobacco mix, that is what they will get. I'm sure someone will cater to them, as well as to those who would want them separate.

That is one of the interesting things about the free market, products are designed around what the consumer (you) wants.

 

[OO]

Politicians and their sic ways to torture harmless people not causing anyone trouble. As long as we are dealing with purebred hypocrites these are the people you cannot trust whether herb is legal or not.

Can I translate this to mean that victimless crimes should not be punished?

 

[NYC5IKH5jabi]

I

Politicians and their sic ways to torture harmless people not causing anyone trouble. As long as we are dealing with purebred hypocrites these are the people you cannot trust whether herb is legal or not.

I swear these are the people who hell is made for. Not those repenting for their mistakes but those who knowingly do wrong then deny their true colors. Hypocrites are the true disease in society. Good vs evil is a constant but hypocrites are a third party. Sleazy politicians, crooked cops, any one with power who deceives others. These people should read up on karma.

 

[OO]

I think that is right, however, there are likely exceptions. I haven't thought much deeper on the subject other than my subjective world view in relation to herb.

Think long and hard, because if you can form a solid argument with few holes in it, you may be able to change someone's perspective on the topic, but it's no easy task.