I haven’t really posted much on the subject over the past year or so, despite huge developments in federal enforcement, state law, the proliferation (until recently) in dispensaries, etc. I’ve been content to let the other blogs handle it, and Kym does an excellent job as does Woods’ on his list (if you’re interested in the issue, and you’re not on his email list, talk to him. He and his network keep very good track of the developments at all levels.).
Even though I live right in the center of the storm, I find myself bored with the issue on an intellectual level. Like other issues such as abortion and gun rights, nobody has said anything original or new in years. I just haven’t been inspired.
Well, this may not be a new thought, but it comes after a little bit of reflection over recent events.
I don’t believe that the recent wave of federal enforcement activity amounts to a new campaign. In my view, they will probably slow down again momentarily. I think they simply wanted to send some shock waves through to rattle the nerves of elected officials and landlords. I don’t think they hope to eliminate dispensaries altogether, but reduce them and control further expansion, particularly in the “red areas” where they catch the most flack for non-enforcement of federal laws. I expect that despite the Ammiano efforts, there won’t be any earth-shaking changes in policy, and I expect enforcement to taper off again now that local governments are passing moratoriums.
The response from legalization advocates? More state referendums. But I think this is a waste of time. Medical marijuana has passed in about 20 states, and the federal government has made pretty clear that it is non-responsive to any symbolic votes. The polls indicate that the majority in the US support legalization to some degree, but it has not reached the point where there are any serious political liabilities for opposing a change in policy so the momentum is with the status quo. I don’t think rallies or civil disobedience will make a difference here.
I’m certain that the advocate groups have already considered this, and maybe they’re working on it, but at this point the only changes will come from acts of Congress. And the only way you can get anything from Congress is to lobby. NORML and MPP have already begun to the transition of strategy. But I’m thinking that there really needs to be a coordinated federal lobby strategy, and that the bulk of the advocates’ resources should be put into hiring, yes, professional lobbyists with connections to key committee members, and to focus on the Barney Frank bill currently trapped in some committee which would essentially eliminate federal enforcement against individuals and entities compliant with their state laws. It’s not paradise, but it would represent a game-changing turn.
And I really do believe that state referendums are a complete waste of time at this point. Proposition 19′s failure (regardless of whom you blame) probably set up the political basis for the more recent federal raids. Most people, and TV pundits, don’t pay too much attention to the details of opposition. Legalization failed. That was the headline. And had it won, it would not have held up to federal law as the Supreme Court has already ruled that drug enforcement laws are Constitutional under the Commerce Clause. Lawsuits are a waste of resources. Referendums are a waste of time. You need high profile Congressional representatives calling for a change in policy. Bottom line.
14 comments
Comments feed for this article
January 2, 2012 at 12:41 pm
Anonymous
“You need high profile Congressional representatives calling for a change in policy. Bottom line.”
Sad but true. And even more pathetic, they need lots and lots of money to “move the process along” whether they keep it for themselves or not…nothing free in the land of the free. The stadium proposition for…was it sacramento?…is a prime example. Proponents for a new stadium to be subsidized by the general public dumped hundreds of thousands of dollars into promoting their measure. Opponents, who would rather have the sports team shareholders and the real estate enterprises pay for their own business venture, didn’t even raise money into the tens of thousands of dollars to fight the bill, but managed a very large portion of the vote…it wasn’t a landslide win. If oppositoin could have afforded the advertising to simply put the word out in plain language what was going on, one can bet the taxpayers wouldn’t have voted themselves more debt. One of countless examples of bu$ine$$ a$ u$ual running the show.
Handshakes between millionairres behind closed doors decides our fate.
January 2, 2012 at 2:11 pm
Fred Mangels
Yes, but if you had more successful referendums, that might make the issue seem popular enough that a few congresscritters might be willing to speak up on the issue and change things.
January 2, 2012 at 3:02 pm
Eric Kirk
Fred – Again, we’ve had about 20 referendums. I believe that all but one medical marijuana initiative passed. And we’ve already passed it in California. I just think we’re at a logjam until there’s a breakthrough at the federal level.
January 2, 2012 at 6:09 pm
Fred Mangels
It’s starts at the bottom, though. They’re not going to do anything at the federal level until there’s a groundswell of support at the state and local level. How else can you do that but by referendum and such? It’s not going to happen by voting for the same status quo candidates unless those candidates feel safe in broaching the issue (as Gary Johnson and Ron Paul do).
January 2, 2012 at 6:26 pm
Eric Kirk
There already is a groundswell. 20 states, nearly all of the states with a referendum. Nearly all of them passed, most of them not even close. What else can we do? Pass them again?
January 2, 2012 at 7:08 pm
pathetic actually
ek no, but another 20 states might help
January 2, 2012 at 7:33 pm
Eric Kirk
Well, I don’t think there are 20 more states with initiative systems, but in any case, I disagree. It’s time for the movement to learn the rules of mainstream politics and play them well.
January 3, 2012 at 6:34 am
Steve
When we were in South Dakota last June we stayed at Alex White Plume’s place and he and Sparky were united about starting a Native American medical marijuana distribution network (Sparky’s idea) and Alex’s already at the U.N. level demanding Native American sovereignty rights to establish industrial hemp production on tribal lands. You see NAs have this advantage over the rest of us in that they are under Fed regulation on tribal lands yet are being denied medical marijuana rights so that NAs are being put at risk for cancer treatments, etc, something the Fed cannot ignore except they are because NAs haven’t pushed this issue en mass yet, it’s still a very new idea to tribes. Sparky, as Bear River’s official spiritual leader, is leading this NA med marijuana issue here in Humboldt County, btw, but because neither he or I are in the Prog loop you guys don’t talk to us and go on spinning the NORML lawyerese b.s. that so far has only paid NORML lawyers salaries and after, what? 30 years? of uselessness are still begging for funds? Not a smart move to keep feeding a failed strategy..Native rights can topple the Fed’s position if we back them.
January 3, 2012 at 11:00 pm
Bruce Ross
I’m no political organizer, but just as an observer it seems the way to change congressional opinions is not to lobby but to win elections.
One of the fascinating parts of Dan Okrent’s book about Prohibition was how the temperance movement was pretty much the first single-issue voters. They’d vote Democratic, Republican, tariff or free-trade, gold standard or free silver — but darn it they’d vote against a wet and for a dry. Even if you’re never a majority, that passion for a particular issue gets results.
It might have happened, but I’m not aware of a single congressional race even in California — where you might expect it — where the dominant question was whether to relax federal marijuana laws even to comport with state laws.
Mind you, Eric, I disagree with your premise. A majority of Americans supports “some degree” of legalization only if you count even the tiniest degrees. Nevada — a libertarian bastion — and California have both voted on legalization referenda just in the past few years. You know the results.
January 4, 2012 at 6:07 pm
Eric Kirk
Bruce – I think Gallup has been showing a slight majority in favor of the general question, but as you suggest the proverbial devil is always in the proverbial details.
But medical marijuana doesn’t even seem to be a serious debate as it’s passed in all but one state in which it was presented. And if the bill ever gets out of committee, it might stand a chance with civil libertarian liberals and states rights conservatives. But getting it out of committee takes lobbying. Lobbyists have been successful on many issues which haven’t been on the radar in elections. Perhaps even more so.
I haven’t read Okrent’s book, but I did read some old Mencken columns where he argued that prohibition was a key issue. The Depression kind of overwhelmed it by 1932 (and Mencken completely missed the switchover of black voters from the GOP to the Democratic Party, because he missed the Depression as a voting issue).
And yet, prohibition was defeated within the year.
I wrote about Mencken’s columns a while back. He was a writing genius, but a lousy pundit.
http://kunsoo1024.wordpress.com/2006/10/09/hl-mencken-and-old-patterns-which-never-die/
January 5, 2012 at 8:06 am
Steve
Each and every time I post alternative marijuana prohibition overcoming strategies they are ignored as Eric orchestrates the stagnate thinking that cannot see beyond existing failed legal strategies. How you guys do it is beyond me, this keeping tabs of politics of corrupted bureaucracies and no vision legal pot lawyering all protecting their established and lucrative edifices so that no real change can occur. The dissonance between counterculture dreams of social change and what actually passes as social change dialogue on these local blogs is amazing to see continue on and on seemingly forever guaranteeing the same ol same ol will be with us ad infinitum. When will you start thinking outside the boxes you allow vested interests put you in to keep you from doing anything that really works.
January 5, 2012 at 5:51 pm
bross@redding.com
If the stack by your bedside ever gets short, “Last Call” was fascinating in many ways and a great read. And the parallels to the debates about marijuana actually run deeper than the obvious ones, as Okrent himself has written.
January 9, 2012 at 4:36 pm
Finrod Felagund
Precisely.
January 10, 2012 at 10:11 am
Anonymous
eric will not allow change because his big fish status in this little pond would go away, and his “fame” would go away. his ego will never allow that.