Sponsored by

VGoodiez 420EDC
  • Welcome to VaporAsylum! Please take a moment to read our RULES and introduce yourself here.
  • Need help navigating the forum? Find out how to use our features here.
  • Did you know we have lots of smilies for you to use?

Law The Cannabis Chronicles - Misc Cannabis News

From US News and World Report.

Marijuana Doomsday Didn't Come
Those who thought Colorado's legalization would be a catastrophe were wrong then and are wrong now.

It's been a little more than five years since Colorado's voters approved Constitutional Amendment 64, which legalized recreational marijuana in the state. Sales commenced four years ago this January. Although the amendment passed by a comfortable 10-point margin, the debate in Colorado has continued in the years since prohibition ended, most recently flaring up with an editorial published in the Colorado Springs Gazette. Last month, the Gazette's editorial board referred to what has happened in Colorado as "an embarrassing cautionary tale," before presenting a laundry list of the purported ill-effects of the change in the law.

That list included everything from the smell of burning marijuana, to increased homelessness, to rampant teen drug use, to a doubling of the number of drivers involved in fatal accidents who test positive for marijuana. This last charge is particularly puzzling as there is no reliable DUI test for marijuana, and drug tests can't distinguish between marijuana ingested immediately before driving and marijuana ingested a month or more before driving. Not to be dissuaded by science, the editorial board went so far as to quote Marijuana Accountability Coalition founder Justin Luke Riley, who holds that legal marijuana is "devastating our kids and devastating whole communities."

All of this is doubtlessly music to Attorney General Jeff Sessions' ears, who is presently making noise about increasing the federal government's involvement in the fight against legalization. Sessions is on record as saying that "good people don't smoke marijuana." He has also supported the death penalty for marijuana dealers, lest there be any doubt which way he breaks on matters of drug prohibition. He recently went so far as to refer to marijuana as "a life-wrecking dependency" which is only "slightly less awful" than heroin.

Between Sessions and the Colorado Springs Gazette one could be forgiven for thinking that marijuana legalization is one of the most pernicious political decisions made in the modern era. Except it isn't. And there is a pretty significant body of evidence that indicates as much.

On the most basic level, it should be clear to all that the end of prohibition has not "devastated communities." Colorado is every bit as functional now as it was prior to legalization. Life goes on pretty much as usual. But the breathless assertions that children are somehow being harmed deserves consideration.

As it turns out, teen drug use in Colorado is currently at its lowest level in a decade, this according to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health. A little more than 9 percent of Coloradans aged 12 to 17 report using marijuana. And while that figure is higher than the national average for that age group, it is also the lowest rate in Colorado since 2007-2008. Meanwhile, alcohol, tobacco and heroin use among Colorado teens are all down as well.

So whatever else one might say about the wisdom of legalization, it is impossible to conclude that legalization has increased teen drug use. In no small part, this is due to the tremendous financial incentive legal cannabis businesses owners have to check IDs. Legal cannabis business owners must invest thousands of dollars in licensing fees, and tens-of-thousands of dollars in their physical shops. A business owner who sells to minors stands to lose all of that investment, in addition to going to jail. The corner dealer, not having an investment at risk and facing the prospect of jail time regardless of whether he sells to a minor or to an adult, is much less worried about selling to minors. Of course, black-market marijuana dealers are a lot harder to find in Colorado now too.

It is more likely that there is a larger trend at work given the declines in the consumption of other drugs. Whatever the answer, marijuana usage most certainly did not increase as a result of the change in the law as was often predicted both before and after legalization.

But what about crime rates? Comparing the three years prior to legalization to the three years since legalization yields a bit of a mixed bag. The homicide rate in Colorado is down, the robbery rate is down and the burglary rate is down. However, these measures have fallen for the country as a whole over the same period. Comparing crime rates in Colorado relative to the U.S. before and after legalization, the homicide rate is down, but other crime rates are up. With only three years' worth of data to draw on, there are no hard conclusions to draw. At worst, the mixed bag leaves the effect of marijuana legalization on crime an open question.

While some have reported that the homelessness problem has increased in Denver, that's only true (and barely so) for chronic homelessness. Chronic homelessness is up 2 percent, but chronic homelessness comprises only one-fifth of total homelessness. Total homelessness in Denver is actually down more than 7 percent post- versus pre-legalization.

Marijuana opponents like Sessions are quick to identify all sorts of evils that will befall society in the wake of legalization. What opponents conveniently ignore are the myriad evils that befall society precisely because of prohibition. Today, over half a million Americans are arrested each year for marijuana possession. That's more than are arrested annually for all violent crimes combined. Each one of those half-million annual arrests represents a family that is subjected to financial, psychic and sometimes physical harm from police, prosecutors and courts.

Enough is enough. Evidence from Colorado shows that marijuana legalization does not lead to increased teen usage, does not lead to increased homelessness, and does not lead to societal breakdown. If marijuana does destroy lives, it is only because zealots like Sessions make it so. Saving people from themselves at the cost of their liberty is, generally speaking, a bad idea. When it comes to marijuana it is an especially bad idea. And all the lies and distortions of the truth will not change that.
 

Cory Booker Finds Co-Sponsor For Marijuana Legalization Bill

This could be a huge win for not only Booker, but proponents of legal cannabis everywhere.

New Jersey Senator Cory Booker remains at the forefront of cannabis legalization, not only in the state of New Jersey but on a federal level.

Back in August, Booker introduced a progressive new policy to federal lawmakers called the Marijuana Justice Act, which would effectively remove cannabis from the controlled substances list, amongst a plethora of other things.

This week, his endeavor, once again, picked up steam as the New Jersey senator received the support of U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, who became the first U.S. Senator to officially co-sponsor the marijuana legalization bill.

A Dynamic Duo: Cory Booker Finds Co-Sponsor For Marijuana Legalization Bill
On Monday, the senators took to Facebook Live to express their excitement over the new team-up. Booker noted that their conjoined effort is necessary to stop the broken prohibition system the U.S. currently employs.

“I’m thrilled that my colleague, Senator Wyden, has joined me on this groundbreaking bill,” Senator Booker said.“It’s long past due that we fix our nation’s deeply broken drug laws, which disproportionately impact low-income communities and communities of color. This is more than a bill—it’s about ensuring equal justice for all, and I won’t stop fighting until our criminal justice system is reformed.”


Wyden echoed Booker’s sentiments and noted that with the Trump administration in place, it’s more important than ever to fight for change.

“Jeff Sessions and the Trump administration are still trying to fight a 1980s drug war that is socially unjust, economically backward and against the will of the American people,” Wyden said. “I’m proud to join forces with Senator Booker to fight this administration’s attempts to shift our country into reverse when it comes to federal marijuana policy. It’s more important now than ever to update outdated policies, right the wrongs against communities of color, and continue our work to lift up the voices of the many Americans who are speaking out in favor of legalization.”

Final Hit: Cory Booker Finds Co-Sponsor For Marijuana Legalization Bill
Booker, who took office back in 2013 after serving as the mayor of Newark from 2006-13, has been an outspoken critic of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the Trump administration’s attempts to double down on cannabis prohibition, despite the progress made over the past several years.

To combat Sessions, Booker proposed the aforementioned Marijuana Justice Act, which, according to his website, will do as follows:

· Remove marijuana from the list of controlled substances, making it legal at the federal level;

· Incentivize states through federal funds to change their marijuana laws if marijuana in the state is illegal and the state disproportionately arrests or incarcerates low-income individuals and people of color for marijuana-related offenses;

· Automatically expunge federal marijuana use and possession crimes;

· Allow an individual currently serving time in federal prison for marijuana use or possession crimes to petition a court for a resentencing;

· Create a community reinvestment fund to reinvest in communities most impacted by the failed War on Drugs and allow those funds to be invested in the following programs:

o Job training;


o Reentry services;

o Expenses related to the expungement of convictions;

o Public libraries;

o Community centers;

o Programs and opportunities dedicated to youth; and

o Health education programs.

Booker also noted that he believes the federal government is behind the eight ball when it comes to marijuana policy and should reform policy to mirror that of incumbent state laws in pot-friendly regions. He pointed to the rescheduling of cannabis as a solid step in the right direction.

“Descheduling marijuana and applying that change retroactively to people currently serving time for marijuana offenses is a necessary step in correcting this unjust system,” Booker said. “States have so far led the way in reforming our criminal justice system and it’s about time the federal government catches up and begins to assert leadership.”
 
This is incredibly important.

Portland Companies are Fighting a Secret Plot to Monopolize Cannabis
“It’s top secret strategic shit going on to take over large swaths of the genetic IP to all cannabis plants. It’s crooked shit."

In a former nursery on the outskirts of Canby, next door to filbert orchards and the constant gunshots of a firing range, Eco Firma Farms' Jesse Peters believes he's helping fight a war for the future of cannabis.

"The patent wars are coming," Peters says. "It's top secret strategic shit going on to take over large swaths of the genetic IP to all cannabis plants. It's crooked shit. If we don't do something right now to protect ourselves, we're all gonna be screwed."

He's standing in an LED-light-filled veg room half-filled with baby plants of Cherry Pie OG and Voodoo Child and tens of other strains, an indoor-grow facility designed to be the most ecologically sustainable in Oregon if not the country. He's 90 percent of the way to being completely carbon neutral with congratulatory letters from PGE to prove it. His 12 grow rooms are stacked double-decker like Lego bricks to save on both space and energy.

4408_potlander_ecofirma_5_web.jpg

(WW Staff)
But all his efforts to become the first fully carbon-neutral farm in Oregon, the entire shared vision of sustainable cannabis in Oregon, will mean nothing if 10 years from now he's not allowed to grow any of his plants—or pays so much in patent licensing fees that small farms like his can't survive.

In an August 23 article, GQ writer Amanda Chicago Lewis spent a year going down a rabbit hole: A secretive company called Biotech Institute LLC had begun registering patents to become the Monsanto of weed, claiming ownership of vast categories of cannabis plants.

Three have already been granted, and according to patent blog Patent Docs they're already enough to cover an estimated 50-70 percent of cannabis currently on the market. But the company didn't seem to exist except as a patent-trolling shell. The writer found ties to former TV show host Montel Williams, cosmetics millionaire Shawn Sedaghat and a lawyer who always seemed to be out of town.

But Lewis' rabbit hole began with a tip from Portland scientist Mowgli Holmes, whose company Phylos Bioscience may also help offer the key to stopping Monsanto or shadowy companies like Biotech from controlling the cannabis future—by genetically testing weed strains to prove they're already in use.

Holmes says that even the first patent Biotech received—for plants with at least 4 percent THC and CBD, without the cannabinoid myrcene—would lock up a "huge, huge portion" of the cannabis market.

Eco Firma's Peters is joining other growers in his plan to have all 62 strains he grows tested at Phylos, which alongside a nonprofit called the Open Cannabis Project is putting together the largest public database of cannabis genetics in the world. Peters is also encouraging other growers to do the same.

4408_potlander_ecofirma_8_web.jpg

(WW Staff)
One of the goals of the Open Cannabis Project is to document "prior art"—essentially proving that these cannabis strains were already in common use before the patents were filed.

"I'm trying to get all of us to come together as an industry, for all of us to protect our future," Peter says. "The more of us get together to do this, the more of a chance we won't all get trapped in some bullshit patent game where Monsanto owns 90 percent of the patents."

Still, Holmes says the fight won't be simple—and challenging a patent after it's been granted is extraordinarily complex and difficult.

"Patents can be challenged, but it's not easy. The easiest way to challenge a patent," he says, "is to infringe on it and make them sue you. But it's risky."

Peters is game for the fight. Even after testing through Phylos revealed that a strain he bred, Voodoo Child, leaked out of his nursery and has been sold by other growers—mistakenly as a different strain called Gorilla Glue—he doesn't believe in patenting weed plants.

"We ran these genetics through public domain, so it belongs to everybody," he says. "I'm not going to patent any strains we have. I'm just trying to make sure no one can take them away from me. Or anyone else, for that matter."

In the meantime, Peters is forming a new genetics company to bank seeds not covered by the patents, in case the legal challenge doesn't go his way, and is now breeding now strains that fall outside of the patents that were granted.

"The strain banking that's going on here is epic," he says. "We'll just keep stomping footprints out there in the 30 percent that's not covered by their patents. We'll populate the whole planet with that stuff until the 30 percent is the 70 percent."
 
Liberty, Jobs, and Freedom: How Cannabis Became a Conservative Issue

At a recent marijuana reform conference in Washington, DC, Rep. Tom Garrett, a freshman Republican congressman from Virginia, told a room full of cannabis activists that their beloved plant meant nothing to him.


'I don't care about marijuana. What I do care about is liberty, justice, and economic opportunity.
Rep. Tom Garrett, (R-Virginia)
“I really don’t care about marijuana,” he declared.

No surprise there. Garrett, a former state prosecutor and winner of the American Conservative Union’s “Defender of Liberty” award, would never be mistaken for an avid dabber.

But then Garrett, 45, reversed course.

“What I do care about,” he said, “is individual liberty. What I do care about is justice. What I do care about is economic opportunity.”

And that, he said, is why six months ago he introduced HR 1227, the Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2017. Garrett’s bill would do just what its title says: remove cannabis from the federal list of controlled substances entirely and allow states to regulate it as they please.

A generation ago, Garrett’s position would have been almost unimaginable for a conservative politician. At best he would have been treated as a harmless, eccentric outlier, a Ron Paul for millennials. At worst he might have been scorned by his own party.

conservatives-cannabis-2.jpg

Freedom Caucus member Rep. Thomas Garrett, (R-VA), right, with Rep. Mark Meadows, (R-SC) speaks to reporters during a news conference in Washington, DC, on Wednesday, July 19, 2017, calling on the House to repeal the Affordable Care Act. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
But today Garrett is a rising star in conservative circles. And his public embrace of legalization is hardly eccentric. Garrett, along with Republican colleagues like Reps. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), Thomas Massie (R-KY), Justin Amash (R-MI), and Matt Gaetz (R-FL), have positioned cannabis legalization as an issue aligned with their core conservative values—and their outspokenness is allowing many fellow conservatives to rethink their long-held opposition to the issue.

Consider these signs of change:

  • Republican support doubled. Earlier this week, a Gallup poll found that 51% of Republicans now support cannabis legalization—the first time that support has crossed into a majority. Among Republicans, that’s a whopping 9-point jump from 2016 and a doubling of support since 2010.
  • Orrin Hatch changed his mind. Hatch, the ancient senator who serves Utah, one of America’s most conservative states, came out as a medical marijuana advocate in dramatic fashion, giving a passionate defense of cannabis research and medicine on the Senate floor last month.
  • Some conservatives are framing this as their issue. In September, right-wing Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), a longtime MMJ defender, wrote a Washington Post op-ed titled “My Fellow Conservatives Should Protect Medical Marijuana From the Government.
  • In red states, conservatives are pushing medical marijuana bills. Around the nation, conservative legislators are introducing medical cannabis legalization measures. In Georgia, Republican state Rep. Allen Peake led the passage of the state’s first CBD oil law last year. Indiana’s first medical marijuana bill was introduced earlier this year by Republican state Rep. Jim Lucas, whose voting record scores 92% from the American Conservative Union and 100% from the National Rifle Association.
Those events came nearly a year after the surprising results of the November 2016 election. A data dive by Leafly shortly after that historic vote found that conservative Trump voters in historically red states and counties—places like North Dakota, Arkansas, and Florida—cast their ballots overwhelmingly in favor of medical marijuana legalization.

As they have been for years, voters were ahead of politicians when it came to cannabis. Even conservative voters.
 
We need to hook up ole' Jeffey with this Minister of Justice Opstelten...and the two of them can be delusional together.


Outrage in the Netherlands: Top officials manipulated Cannabis research to halt legalization

If you thought cannabis legalization in the Netherlands was a free and easy nonevent, you best think again.

In 2015, Dutch TV journalist Bas Haan reported on a secret deal between a hash dealer and the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security. This shock exposé forced then-Minister Ivo Opstelten, a member of the conservative People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), and several of his high-ranking officials to resign.

Then, in December Haan was at it again, releasing yet another explosive news report about how top officials in the Justice Department pressured independent researchers to change their cannabis research to fit the repressive government policy.

Nieuwsuur broke the explosive story on December 6, with Haan writing in a translated version of the text:

Following pressure from senior officials at the Ministry of Justice, an independent research report on regulation of cannabis cultivation in 2014 was drastically adjusted. The research assignment, reports and conclusions were influenced in such a way that the … drugs policy of the Minister of Justice was supported, rather than criticized as researchers had actually established.

It’s thanks to a whistleblower that this latest scandal came to light — a woman who has worked for the independent research and documentation institute WODC since the early ’80s. Although the WODC is housed in the same building as the Ministry of Justice in The Hague, strict protocols ensure that its research is carried out independently. At least, that’s the official line.

The unnamed whistleblower is alleged to have repeatedly complained to her superiors about the manipulation of cannabis research carried out by the WODC. When her protests apparently fell on deaf ears, she decided to inform Haan, a reporter at Nieuwsuur, the country’s most prominent TV news program. Haan was able to access all the complaints as well as hundreds of emails, proving just how far the government manipulation went.

Jan Brouwer, professor of Legal Methods at the University of Groningen in the north of the Netherlands, has studied both versions of the government report. He told Nieuwsuur, “In fact, it says here [in the first version] that municipalities do not experience problems with regard to the size of the coffee shops, that they do not experience any nuisance. … [In the second] version it states that the municipalities experience nuisance as a result of the size [of the coffee shops], which is simply diametrically the opposite of what [was] initially the conclusion of the investigation.”

Even more striking is the manipulation of research into the alleged illegal export of cannabis. The claim that “at least 80 percent” of cannabis produced in the Netherlands is exported was Opstelten’s most often-repeated mantra.

And he used this point to argue against regulation of cannabis cultivation and sales: Even if the cannabis production for the coffee shops were to be regulated, it would solve at most 20 percent of the problem.

This export myth, still widely circulated in Dutch media, has now been proven to be exactly that: A myth, not supported by any reliable data.

The ever-increasing repression of cannabis culture in the Netherlands, the so-called Dutch weed pass banning tourists from coffee shops, the grow-shop ban, the house evictions of small growers — it was all based on fabricated data.

You would almost feel sorry for the new Minister of Justice Ferdinand Grapperhaus, member of current Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s third government, who was installed last October.

Back in 2015, Minister of Justice Opstelten was forced to resign over the aforementioned secret hash deal, which alleged that in 2000, 4.7 million guilders (about USD $2.6 million) was paid to convicted drug dealer Cees H.

When these revelations first came to light, Opstelten responded with a brief statement announcing his departure from the Ministry of Justice:

There has been a lack of certainty about the facts surrounding that settlement and I have concluded that I must now resign.

This shock admission dragged Opstelten’s under minister, the speaker of the House of Representatives, and even his successor down with him.

Opstelten, former mayor of Rotterdam, the second largest Dutch city, led the justice ministry from 2010–2015 and made installing obstacles to cannabis legislation reform his top priority. Taking pride in his hardliner approach, Opstelten introduced a law banning grow shops, the Dutch weed pass keeping tourists from coffee shops, and raised the penalties on pretty much anything related to cannabis, including cultivation.

Opstelten refused to even consider any kind of regulation of cannabis production to supply the coffee shops. In doing so, he forced those establishments to continue their reliance on black market product. Dutch police raid about 5,000 grow ops every year, resulting in high prices for marijuana customers, an almost total lack of lab testing or quality control, and unreliable availability of product.

In 2014, when a group of mayors presented a manifesto — which was signed by more than 35 municipalities — imploring Opstelten to at least allow local experiments with regulation, he reacted in typical fashion:

I will not regulate cannabis. Even if there were ten manifestos, the answer remains convincingly no. I’m the one who decides, not them.

It has now become clear that the research Opstelten used to defend his repressive policies was rigged. An example: In 2014, the WODC concluded that the problems surrounding coffee shops the government wanted to tackle did not exist. Against the will of the report’s authors, the director of the WODC rewrote the conclusions.

Following the sensational Nieuwsuur report, nearly every political party in Dutch parliament submitted a long list of questions about the WODC scandal. The most fundamental enquiry came from left-wing party GroenLinks (whose name translates to GreenLeft), who wrote:

The aforementioned members ask whether you are prepared to reconsider the previously adopted government positions and policy changes with respect to the aforementioned reports and any other manipulated reports? If not, why not?

One of the mayors who has for years been advocating for regulation of cannabis production to supply the coffee shops is Paul Depla, mayor of Breda. He’s had numerous conversations with former Justice Minister Opstelten about the topic. Depla was shocked by the revelations, telling a local newspaper, “First you think, this cannot be true. You have confidence in the government and the WODC. Then you get disconcerted. What report from the WODC can we still believe? The agency’s authority has been thrown away for political purposes.”

Indeed, the implications of the WODC scandal are huge, with Depla agreeing, “The adapted reports have played a very important role in the discussions about [the] weed pass and regulation [of cannabis].”

“The minister did not think he could do both initiatives. The weed pass not because, according to WODC research, coffee shops would continue to cause too much inconvenience and not be regulated by international legislation. We have always resisted that and now appears to be right.”

Referring to the export myth, Depla says, “It is still stated that regulation makes little sense because 80 percent of the [cannabis] is destined for export. But that is also a figure from the WODC.”

To Professor Brouwer, it’s clear what should happen next.

“If I were a member of parliament, I would demand a full parliamentary enquiry,” he told Nieuwsuur.

An excellent suggestion, as such an enquiry could answer the question that has been puzzling foreign journalists and cannabis aficionados alike: How is it possible that the world-famous Dutch tolerance policy turned into a full-blown war on drugs?
 
The Blood Feud That Launched the War on Drugs
By BILL MINUTAGLIO and STEVEN L. DAVIS
January 09, 2018

90

Timothy Leary at the State University of New York at Buffalo during his 1969 lecture tour.



Richard Nixon’s overnight guest at the White House, Art Linkletter, emerged from the Lincoln Bedroom and joined the president for breakfast. It was May 18, 1971. Linkletter had already been a well-known TV and radio personality for decades, most famous for gently teasing children in a show called “Kids Say the Darndest Things.”

He was there because he and Nixon were comrades in arms against a common enemy: drugs, LSD in particular, and the man that, for both of them, represented the nexus between drug culture and the chaos that had come to engulf the late 1960s: psychedelic drug advocate and former Harvard professor Timothy Leary. Nixon had summoned Linkletter to the White House because he wanted his help in launching the crusade that would come to be known as the War on Drugs—and he wanted to start with Leary, whose famous counterculture mantra was “tune in, turn on and drop out.”


This meeting between Nixon and Linkletter was just one bizarre, little-remembered footnote in 1971, a year that would soon spiral out of control for the president. He felt surrounded by enemies, as a sputtering economy and prolonged war in Vietnam damaged his approval rating. Brand new polls suggested that Democratic Senator Edmund Muskie could unseat him in 1972. In the coming weeks, Nixon would be rocked by The New York Times’ publication of the Pentagon Papers. He would create a secret group, dubbed “the Plumbers,” to stop unauthorized leaks and harass his political enemies.

In the middle of this storm, Nixon sensed an opportunity to reverse his political fortunes by demonizing drugs and the counterculture around them. He had become increasingly bellicose on the subject, even meeting with pop star Elvis Presley in a bizarre White House meeting in December 1970, where Nixon shared his opinion that those who used drugs were “anti-American” and where Nixon gifted Elvis, who would later die of a heart attack linked to drug abuse, with an honorary narcotics officer badge. The president’s efforts seemed to be paying off. A new opinion poll indicated that 23 percent of Americans now viewed drugs as America’s No. 1 problem, up from just 3 percent two years earlier.

From the beginning of his fight against drugs, Nixon had zeroed in on Leary. In 1969, Leary had won a unanimous Supreme Court decision over the Nixon administration that struck down a portion of federal marijuana laws. Then, Leary had publicly mocked a high-profile drug interdiction program Nixon announced, Operation Intercept. It became easier to connect what Nixon called “the age of anarchy” with Leary, to see him as a Robespierre on Acid, a kingpin hellbent on unraveling the normal order. He was a subversive, a hippie rebel leader summoning his army, a sociocultural terrorist whose real master plan was to blow up the nation’s moral compass in the name of drugs and free love. Leary was, in the words of Richard Nixon, “the most dangerous man in America.”

Linkletter had a reason to hate drugs, and in particular Leary, too. He was a father of five, but his youngest child, Diane, had committed suicide two years before. She had been 20 when she jumped to her death from a sixth-story window. He had gone public with his grief after his daughter’s death, lashing out in anger at LSD, the drug he assumed had caused her to die.

“It wasn’t suicide, because she wasn’t herself. It was murder … she had a tiger in her bloodstream.”

An autopsy revealed no drugs in his daughter’s system, but Linkletter insisted that she had been tripping on acid when she made her leap. He had launched an anti-drug crusade and focused his anger on one man: “Leary called LSD ‘God’s greatest gift to man…’ And when somebody like Timothy Leary comes out and justifies it, we have got to jump on him with hobnailed boots.” It was this feud with Leary that caught Nixon’s attention.

On the same spring day Linkletter and Nixon were meeting, Leary had once again slipped away from Nixon’s agents. Months earlier, he had broken out of a California prison, where he had been sentenced to 10 years for possessing two marijuana cigarettes. The FBI lost the trail, but the CIA managed to track Leary to Algeria, where he had taken refuge with the Black Panthers. Yet after a falling out with Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver, Leary fled Algeria. Now the FBI and CIA were reporting that the trail had gone cold.

In Washington, Nixon had watched the unassailably genial Linkletter target Leary in speeches and writings. It was beyond fortuitous. They were after the same man, as was one of Nixon’s increasingly important aides: G. Gordon Liddy, one of the chief Plumbers, who was the most fervently obsessed of Leary’s pursuers. He had carried out the earliest drug raids against Leary at an LSD retreat in upstate New York.

Nixon contacted Linkletter and asked him to join a national narcotics commission. Then he invited Linkletter to the White House, and to spend the night in the Lincoln Bedroom, before they planned how to take down Leary and his drugged-out followers.

As he headed to eat with the president, Linkletter was thinking about an article in that morning’s Washington Post—a story about a Nixon administration official who said that penalties for marijuana should be “minimal or non-existent … a fine, like for a parking ticket.”

Sitting down to eat with Nixon, with the White House waiters leaning over to pour coffee, Linkletter jumped right on it: “Well, I’m not very happy about what I read in the paper today,” he said, according to Linkletter’s own recollection of the conversation that he gave years later for the Nixon Presidential Library Oral History Program.


Nixon looked up: “What happened?”

Linkletter began explaining what he had just read in the Post. Suddenly, he saw the president pick up a phone at the breakfast table. Linkletter listened as Nixon ordered that the administration official who was quoted in the story—the one advocating lenient marijuana sentences—be fired immediately.

“I want [him] out of the building and his desk cleaned out, and gone before dusk tonight,” Nixon demanded.

“You shouldn’t do that,” Linkletter interjected, seemingly shocked at the power he had instantly acquired.

Nixon glowered at his guest. “If I have a man in my group that thinks that way, I don’t want him in there—he’s out.”

In the afternoon, Nixon and Linkletter met again, this time in the Oval Office. Unbeknownst to Linkletter, the president had ordered secret recording equipment installed three months earlier. Nixon was taping their conversation. Linkletter began by saying, “There’s a great difference between alcohol and marijuana.”

Nixon replied: “What is it?”

“The worst that you can have when you’re in with other alcoholics is more to drink,” Linkletter said, “so you’ll throw up more and get sicker and be drunker … But when you are with druggers, you can go from marijuana to, say, heroin. Big difference.”

Nixon, quiet for a second, responded. “I see.”

“If, if, if you’re with a guy who suggests you have three more drinks than you should have, you’re just going to get sicker,” Linkletter continued. “But if you’re with a guy who you’re already high and he suggests you try, this instead of this, you can go much further.”

Linkletter let it sink in with Nixon and then continued his explanation: “Another big difference between marijuana and alcohol is that when people smoke marijuana, they smoke it to get high. In every case, when most people drink, they drink to be sociable. You don’t see people—”

Nixon, growing more engaged, interrupted him: “That’s right, that’s right.”

“They sit down with a marijuana cigarette to get high—”

“A person does not drink to get drunk,” Nixon agreed.

Linkletter: “That’s right.”

Nixon: “A person drinks to have fun.” (This was particularly ironic coming from Nixon, who was quickly developing a drinking problem obvious to his staff.)

After a bit, Nixon mused out loud: “I have seen the countries of Asia and the Middle East, portions of Latin America, and I have seen what drugs have done to those countries. Uh, everybody knows what it’s done to the Chinese, the Indians are hopeless anyway, the Burmese. They have different forms of drugs.”

Linkletter: “That’s right.”

Nixon: “Why the hell are those Communists so hard on drugs? Well why they’re so hard on drugs is because, uh, they love to booze. I mean, the Russians, they drink pretty good.”

Linkletter: “That’s right.”

Nixon: “But they don’t allow any drugs. Like that. And look at the north countries. The Swedes drink too much, the Finns drink too much, the British have always been heavy boozers and all the rest, but uh, and the Irish of course the most, uh, but uh, on the other hand, they survive as strong races.”

Linkletter: “That’s right.”


Nixon: “And your drug societies, uh, are, are, inevitably come apart. They…”

Linkletter tried to finish the thought for Nixon: “They lose motivation … No discipline.”

Nixon responded: “Yeah . . . At least with liquor, I don’t lose motivation.”

This conversation, rambling as it may read now, appears to have had a serious impact on Nixon. Nine days after meeting with Linkletter, Nixon accosted Chief of Staff Bob Haldeman. “I want a goddamn strong statement on marijuana,” the president told him. “By God we are going to hit the marijuana thing, and I want to hit it right square in the puss.” The following month, the president would officially declare war on drugs, asking Congress for an unprecedented $155 million (nearly one billion in today’s dollars) to fight “America’s public enemy No. 1.” The War on Drugs has been with us ever since.

***

A month after the White House meeting with Linkletter, Nixon learned that Leary had fled to Switzerland, the very country where LSD had been discovered. Leary hoped to obtain political asylum with the Swiss. Instead, the Nixon administration exerted tremendous diplomatic pressure, even dispatching Attorney General John Mitchell on a secret mission to Bern to argue for Leary’s extradition.

In a Cabinet Room conversation captured by his secret recording equipment two months after the conversation with Linkletter, Nixon and his closest aides were shouting for Leary’s head. “Leary, Leary, Leary … Timothy Leary, Timothy Leary.” Then Nixon bellowed triumphantly to the others, “Well, we’ve got room in the prisons for him!”

Yet Leary, astonishingly, would remain free another 18 months, always one step ahead of Nixon and his increasingly rabid pursuers—until it all came crashing down for him in Kabul, Afghanistan in January 1973. U.S. agents intercepted Leary, subjecting the LSD guru to extraordinary rendition in defiance of international law. Leary returned to the U.S. in shackles, placed in solitary confinement next to Charles Manson, and sentenced to at least fifteen years more in prison. Richard Nixon, just inauguarated for a second term, was beset by increasing troubles, including a much-publicized trial of the Watergate burglars. But Nixon had gotten his man.

Adapted from The Most Dangerous Man in America: Timothy Leary, Richard Nixon and the Hunt for the Fugitive King of LSD by Bill Minutaglio and Steven L. Davis.
 
Exclusive: U.S. Justice Department blindsided banking agency on pot policy flip - sources
#U.S. LEGAL NEWS JANUARY 11, 2018 / 7:13 AM

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - When the U.S. Justice Department said last week it was reversing policy on the $7 billion marijuana business, it failed to first notify federal officials who advise banks in states where the drug is legal, sources in Congress said.

The announcement by U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a longtime critic of legalizing marijuana, caused confusion among banks about how to do business with marijuana growers, processors and distributors without running afoul of federal money laundering laws.

The uncertainty unleashed a flood of phone calls to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), an office within the U.S. Treasury Department, from congressional offices with questions from lawmakers and constituents.


But FinCEN had no ready answers because it received no advance warning of Sessions’ Jan. 4 announcement rescinding an Obama-era policy that had eased up on federal enforcement of marijuana laws, said congressional aides who spoke on condition of anonymity.

A Justice Department spokesman declined to comment about whether it had coordinated with FinCEN in advance.

The abrupt announcement by Sessions was the latest example of sudden actions by the Trump administration that have blind-sided its own government agencies on major policy shifts. In 2017 the administration blindsided the Defense Department with a decision to ban transgender Americans from serving in the military. It also took many by surprise at the Department of Homeland Security by barring people from some predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States.


Marijuana is banned by federal law but it has become legal in one form or another in a number of states.

About 400 banks and credit unions do business with the U.S. marijuana industry. Most are small institutions with operations limited to states where marijuana has been legalized.

Critics said the Justice Department’s decision, which gives prosecutors wide latitude to pursue criminal charges, could drive banks out of the cannabis industry.

Sessions issued his one-page announcement three days after California formally launched the world’s largest regulated commercial market for recreational marijuana. Five other states have legalized recreational use, while dozens permit medicinal use.

“I imagine that Sessions did not even contemplate that his action could trigger potentially billions of dollars of cash from being unbanked,” said Saphira Galoob, whose firm The Liaison Group lobbies on behalf of cannabis clients.

Reversing the Obama administration, Sessions said the Justice Department was withdrawing legal guidelines known as the Cole and Ogden memos, widely seen as giving safe harbour against prosecution to cannabis businesses in states where pot is legal.

The memos said that, while marijuana was still illegal, prosecutors would not prioritize pursuing criminal charges in states that had set up their own regulatory regimes.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said in September that the marijuana policy was under review for possible changes.

In last week’s announcement, the Justice Department made no mention of parallel marijuana guidance that FinCEN issued in February 2014 in coordination with Justice officials.


The guidance provided a pathway for banks to serve marijuana businesses in states such as Oregon, Colorado, Washington and California. It relied heavily on the Cole memo.

FinCEN requires banks to file suspicious activity reports with the government on legally questionable transactions. The FinCEN guidance says banks must continue to file those reports, but lets them say if they are confident that their cannabis customers are complying with relevant state laws.

Democratic Representatives Dennis Heck of Washington state and Ed Perlmutter of Colorado are expected this week to send a letter, seen by Reuters, to FinCEN urging it not to rescind the guidance amid concerns that doing so could “inject uncertainty in the financial markets.”

Stephen Hudak, a FinCEN spokesman, said in a statement that the agency’s guidance “remains in place,” despite the Justice Department’s actions.
 
Pro-Cannabis Trump Voters Feeling Betrayed After Sessions Move
PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — The Trump administration’s anti-marijuana move has some members of the president’s voting base fuming.


RELATED STORY
Sessions Rescinds Cole Memo, Which Protected State-Legal Cannabis From Feds

Fans of President Donald Trump who use marijuana say Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ move to tighten federal oversight of the drug is the first time they’ve felt let down by the man they helped elect. The move feels especially punitive to Trump voters who work in the growing industry around legalized marijuana that has taken root in states of all political stripes.

“Trump needs to realize that a lot of his supporters are pro-cannabis and it would be extremely hurtful to them if he allowed Sessions to move forward with this.”
Damara Kelso, Trump voter & operator of Sugar Shack Farms in Oregon
It remains to be seen whether Trump’s cannabis-supporting voters will take their anger to the ballot box in 2018 and 2020. But pro-legalization conservatives are also chiding the administration’s anti-cannabis move as an affront to personal liberties and states’ rights.

“Trump needs to realize that a lot of his supporters are pro-cannabis and it would be extremely hurtful to them if he allowed Sessions to move forward with this,” said Damara Kelso, a Trump voter who runs Sugar Shack Farms, a marijuana grower in Eugene, Oregon. “It’s not lazy pothead stoners smoking weed all day in their parents’ basement.”

Sessions’ move allows federal prosecutors to decide what to do when state rules conflict with federal. It comes as legalization of marijuana is at an all-time high in popularity with Republicans.


RELATED STORY
Here’s Where US Attorneys Stand on Cannabis Enforcement

A Gallup poll from last year found 51 percent of Republicans expressed support for legalization of the drug. It was the first time a majority of GOP supporters supported the idea and represented a jump of 9 percentage points from the previous year. In the early 2000s, only about one in five Republicans agreed with legalization.

Legalization has also flourished at the state level. Maine, Nevada, Massachusetts and California all voted to make recreational marijuana use legal for adults in 2016. It is also legal in Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Alaska and Washington, D.C. Alaska and Maine gave Trump electoral votes in 2016.

Marijuana legalization is typically most popular with the libertarian-leaning wing of the Republican Party. But any such Republicans who felt Trump would be a pro-marijuana president were misguided, said Jeffrey Miron, a Harvard University economist who studies the economics of libertarianism with a focus on illegal drugs.


RELATED STORY
Data Dive: Legalization No Longer a Partisan Issue, Election Data Show

Cannabis-loving Trump fans might be experiencing buyer’s remorse, but it’s too early to say whether that could make a difference at the voting polls, Miron said.

“Libertarians certainly knew when he appointed Jeff Sessions that there was a serious risk in an escalation of the war on drugs,” he said. “I think you get what you pay for.”

Still, some of Trump’s high-profile supporters are criticizing the move.

Roger Stone, a former Trump campaign adviser with whom the president has a long and rocky history, shared a video on Facebook on Jan. 7 urging Trump to support legalization and block Sessions’ move. And some Republicans in Congress have also slammed the decision.


RELATED STORY
Leafly Interview: Dirty Trickster Roger Stone Talks Cannabis Legalization & Trump

“We have a Constitution to protect people from the federal government,” Republican Rep. Jason Lewis, R-Minnesota, a Trump voter, said in an interview. “This is a longstanding limited-government principle.”

Trump fans who use medical marijuana are also concerned they could lose access to treatment. In rural Fryeburg, Maine, college student Zac Mercauto drives two hours roundtrip, he said, to buy marijuana to manage chronic pain and other health problems. He said he would hate to lose that ability to federal politics.

Mercauto is also one of thousands of Mainers who helped give Trump his sole New England electoral vote. Unlike most states, Maine splits its electoral votes by congressional district, and Trump won the vast 2nd District, home to both New England conservatism and a marijuana culture.


RELATED STORY
Politicians Outraged: Sessions Move ‘Trampled the Will of the Voters’

Mercauto, who had his picture taken with Trump in 2016, said he is still a big fan of the president. But he believes the anti-pot move is bad for his state’s economy and health.

“I believe it’s going to take a hit at medical marijuana and the industry as a whole here in Maine,” he said. “It’s disappointing to see him take that stab at the industry. And I guarantee you all the tax money the state of Maine from medical marijuana really helps people all around.”
 
Legal marijuana cuts violence says US study, as medical-use laws see crime fall
Jamie Doward Sat 13 Jan 2018


Murder and violent crime found to have decreased most in states bordering Mexico as drug cartels lose business to regulation



Marijuana is sold legally at a dispensary in California. Photograph: Mathew Sumner/AP
The introduction of medical marijuana laws has led to a sharp reduction in violent crime in US states that border Mexico, according to new research.

According to the study, Is Legal Pot Crippling Mexican Drug Trafficking Organizations? The Effect of Medical Marijuana Laws on US Crime, when a state on the Mexican border legalised medical use of the drug, violent crime fell by 13% on average. Most of the marijuana consumed in the US originates in Mexico, where seven major cartels control the illicit drug trade.

“These laws allow local farmers to grow marijuana that can then be sold to dispensaries where it is sold legally,” said the economist Evelina Gavrilova, one of the study’s authors. “These growers are in direct competition with Mexican drug cartels that are smuggling the marijuana into the US. As a result, the cartels get much less business.”

The knock-on effect is a reduction in levels of drug-related violence. “The cartels are in competition with one another,” Gavrilova explained. “They compete for territory, but it’s also easy to steal product from the other cartels and sell it themselves, so they fight for the product. They also have to defend their territory and ensure there are no bystanders, no witnesses to the activities of the cartel.

“Whenever there is a medical marijuana law we observe that crime at the border decreases because suddenly there is a lot less smuggling and a lot less violence associated with that.”

While the Mexican cartels smuggle other drugs such as cocaine, heroine and metamphetamine across the border, the market for marijuana is the largest drug market in the US and the one from which the cartels can make the fattest profit. It costs around $75 to produce a pound of marijuana in Mexico, which can then be sold on for $6,000 depending on the quality.

Gavrilova, along with fellow researchers Takuma Kamada and Floris Zoutman,studied data from the FBI’s uniform crime reports and supplementary homicide records covering 1994 to 2012. They found that among the border states the effect of the change in law was largest in California, where there was a reduction of 15% in violent crime, and weakest in Arizona, where there was a fall of 7%. The crimes most strongly affected were robbery, which fell by 19%, and murder, which dropped by 10%. Homicides specifically related to the drug trade fell by an astonishing 41%.

The authors claim their study provides new insights into methods to reduce violent crime related to drug trafficking. But its publication comes as the US attorney general, Jeff Sessions, is rescinding the Obama-era policy that ushered in the medical marijuana laws.

“When the effect on crime is so significant, it’s obviously better to regulate marijuana and allow people to pay taxes on it rather than make it illegal,” Gavrilova said. “For me it’s a no brainer that it should be legal and should be regulated, and the proceeds go to the Treasury.”

More than 20 states across the US have implemented medical marijuana laws so far. In those that have, there is now one marijuana dispensary for every six regular pharmacies.

The study suggests that the full legalisation of marijuana in Colorado and Washington will have an even stronger impact on the drug trade as large-scale marijuana production facilities are erected in these states, further threatening the position of drug cartels.

Anecdotal evidence suggests the cartels are now trying to get into the legal marijuana business in California by opening their own farms. Others are turning to human trafficking and kidnapping to shore up their falling profits. There are also reports that some cartels are switching to new forms of drug cultivation by growing poppies in Mexico to produce their own heroin rather than importing it from Afghanistan.
 

MPP Releases 2018 Strategic Plan


MPP is excited to be moving into 2018 at a time when marijuana policy reform has unprecedented momentum. While there are sure to be challenges ahead, MPP is confident that we will make great strides this year.

You can find the strategic plan here.

In a great sign of things to come, one of our goals is already on the verge of success. On Thursday, the Vermont legislature passed a bill that would make possession and limited home cultivation legal in the Green Mountain State! The bill is expected to be signed into law in the coming weeks.

As you can see in our strategic plan, 2018 will be another ambitious year for MPP. Please help us make this year as productive and successful as the last. If you like what you see, would you please donate to our work?

Federal Policy
  • Pressure Congress to renew Rohrabacher Amendment (which protects medical marijuana from federal interference) and add McClintock-Polis Amendment (which protects adult use/legalization from federal interference)
  • Push for legislation that establishes marijuana as a states’ rights issue and does not require annual renewal
  • De-schedule marijuana
  • Fix the 280E tax problem
  • Work to resolve federal banking issues so that banks can provide financial services to state-legal marijuana businesses
  • Improve medical marijuana access for veterans
Ballot Initiatives
  • Pass the 2018 Utah medical marijuana initiative
  • Pass the 2018 Michigan marijuana legalization initiative
  • Support the 2018 medical marijuana initiatives in Missouri and Oklahoma
State Legislatures
  • Legalize marijuana legislatively in 2018 in Vermont and assist with legalizing marijuana in New Jersey
  • Legalize marijuana in either 2018 or 2019 in Connecticut, Delaware, and Rhode Island
  • Build foundation to legalize marijuana by 2020 in Illinois and New Hampshire
  • Pass medical marijuana legislation in either 2018 or 2019 in South Carolina and assist with the passage of medical marijuana legislation in Kentucky
 
From Roll Call...just in case anyone saw this as a purely partisan issue.

Why Democrats Don’t Want to Talk About Legalizing Marijuana

As the Trump administration begins to crack down on states that legalized marijuana, advocates for legalization hope Democrats will take their side.

But many Democrats are still squeamish about fully embracing the drug.

Earlier this month, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the Justice Department would reverse the policy from the Obama administration that restricted federal prosecution of marijuana offenses in states where it was legalized.

When asked, Democratic senators were cagey about how they felt about getting behind full legalization for recreational purposes, even in states that have taken the plunge.

Both California and Nevada voted in 2016 to legalize marijuana. But the two senators elected from those states that year sound less enthusiastic than the voters.

Watch: 4 Arrests After Pot ‘Smoke In’ on Capitol Lawn

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto’s communications director Ray Benitez said Cortez Masto does not support legalization but will defend the interests of her state in the face of Sessions’ actions.

“Because that is up to the voter, she is standing up for what voters want,” he said. “She’s a big believer in defending and supporting states rights.”

Tyrone Gayle, press secretary for Sen. Kamala Harris, said she supports reclassifying marijuana from a Schedule I drug, in the same class as heroin and LSD, to Schedule II, which includes pharmaceutical drugs “with a high potential for abuse.”

Want insight more often? Get Roll Call in your inbox

But Harris also “believes states should be allowed to do what they want,” Gayle said.

California’s senior senator, Dianne Feinstein, who opposed the state’s efforts to legalize marijuana in 2016, dodged the question when asked about Sessions’ move to ramp up federal prosecution.

“It’s all unclear to me, and it’d be helpful to have some clarity so we know exactly what the situation is,” she said.

Fearing weakness
The wariness around fully supporting marijuana comes despite the fact that public attitudes toward the drug have become more favorable.

In October, a Gallup poll showed 64 percent of Americans supported legalizing marijuana, up from 58 percent in 2013. Only a third of Americans supported legalization in 2001.

Erik Altieri, executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said many Democrats are afraid of being seen as weak on drugs.

“I think it’s the scars left over from the ’80s and early ’90s where Republicans weaponized being soft on crime,” he said. Those charges, in his view, were “full of baloney.”

Altieri said championing legalization could pay political dividends for the party.

“In some ways that point may have passed to look like you are taking a principled stance,” he said. “[But] this action by Jeff Sessions should drive the Democrats.”

And those who don’t get on board “are going to find themselves on the wrong side of history,” he said.

Other experts urged caution. Sam Kamin, professor of marijuana law and policy at the University of Denver, said while support for legalization is increasing, it isn’t enough to move an election.

“I hear from political types support for marijuana is broad but not very deep,” he said. “While it’s popular, it’s not the thing that changes people’s minds to support a candidate.”

Campaigning on cannabis
Marijuana could become something of a fault line for Democrats as they head into the midterms and look ahead to 2020.

Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, who is up for re-election this year, when asked about full legalization, said, “I support medicinal marijuana and have for some time.”

Other Democrats are taking a chance on the issue.

Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey has been explicit in his support of legalization. Last year, he introduced legislation supporting full legalization nationwide, and he said there will likely be more momentum among Democrats as their constituents push them.

“People are ahead of the party,” he said.

Booker’s legislation would withhold some federal funds from states where marijuana is illegal if their laws have a disproportionate effect on communities of color.

Altieri said framing marijuana legalization as a racial justice issue is a winning message.

“I think if you are talking about criminal justice reform or racial discrimination, the criminalization of marijuana has played a role in all those,” Kamin said. “I think that particularly for core Democratic voters, that has a lot of resonance.”

Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas is making legalization of marijuana part of his Senate campaign against Sen. Ted Cruz.

“If I don’t bring it up in a meeting, it is brought up by a constituent,” he said. “I can be in a small town [or] big city, and it cuts across party lines.”

But Kamin said support for marijuana legalization will gain steam only when more moderates come out in support of legalization.

“It’s the centrist vote that will move the conversation along.”
 
IMO Warren is completely and utterly full of shit. As far as my research goes, Warren has NEVER co-sponsored any MJ legalization legislation. None. I am quite willing, however, to be proven wrong.

Ah, but now that its a populist issue, this little self-serving gadfly is all over it. Sorry, Warren, but leading from behind doesn't cut it.


Sen. Elizabeth Warren plans legislation to protect states' marijuana rights
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts, said Monday that she is working with a bipartisan group of lawmakers to protect states' rights to legalize marijuana.

"I'm working with a bipartisan group to try to roll back the changes that the attorney general has made so that the states can make their own determination about their marijuana laws and how they want to enforce them," Warren said in a brief interview with reporters in Cambridge.

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions recently announced that he was rescinding Obama-era guidelines that said the Department of Justice would not prosecute marijuana crimes in states where marijuana was legal.
 
IMO Warren is completely and utterly full of shit. As far as my research goes, Warren has NEVER co-sponsored any MJ legalization legislation. None. I am quite willing, however, to be proven wrong.

Ah, but now that its a populist issue, this little self-serving gadfly is all over it. Sorry, Warren, but leading from behind doesn't cut it.
I tend to agree with you here. She reminds me of an ambulance chaser....
 
I feel that @Baron23's political posts should come to an end. It's one thing to post an article but to give a biased an unfactual commentary is unacceptable. These posts and rants are becoming too frequent and consistent.
This is something that @momofthegoons has tried to prevent here at Vapor Asylum as political discussions quickly got out of hand at FC.
 
I feel that @Baron23's political posts should come to an end. It's one thing to post an article but to give a biased an unfactual commentary is unacceptable. These posts and rants are becoming too frequent and consistent.
This is something that @momofthegoons has tried to prevent here at Vapor Asylum as political discussions quickly got out of hand at FC.

Thanks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BD9
Firstly, I want to say that I appreciate @Baron23 's contributions to this community. He has worked hard to supply us with all the current cannabis legalization efforts (or anti) and news.

@BD9 is correct in that I do not want general political argument and discussion here at the Asylum. It divides us. The reason I have allowed discussion of cannabis politics is simple. We all pretty much agree on it. And want to see cannabis legalized. But when we start to make disparaging comments and freely give those opinions about the politicians involved it can create a problem. It can provoke arguments and bad feelings and the tone changes. And I take responsibility for letting it go on for too long since we've reached that point here. So I would ask that the commentary be tempered please.

All this said, in the future it would also be better to hit the report button when one has an issue with a post. Calling out a member publicly is also something that provokes argument and bad feelings.

Let's remember that this forum is about supporting each other. And that we are united in our use of our medicine. :smile:
 
I feel that @Baron23's political posts should come to an end. It's one thing to post an article but to give a biased an unfactual commentary is unacceptable. These posts and rants are becoming too frequent and consistent.
This is something that @momofthegoons has tried to prevent here at Vapor Asylum as political discussions quickly got out of hand at FC.
I thought I was being quite factual. Matter of fact, somewhere in here I recently posted an article on who has and who has not ever co-sponsored any MJ legalization initiatives, without regard for party alignment. In thr case of Warren, I believe that my facts are correct but that I was quite willing to be proved wrong.....which hasn't happened yet.

I also note that nobody seemed to mind my posting comments critical of Sessions (many, many, many critical comments) based on the content of an article.

I have written to @momofthegoons for guidance as I am completely dedicated to remaining within the board's rules. But if it turns out that I am not allowed to comment on articles that deal with legalization issues, which by their nature will have some degree of political content or commentary, then I'm not sure I want to keep posting them.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
GOP And Democratic Gubernatorial Candidates Agree: Legalize Marijuana

Legalizing marijuana is going to be a huge issue in 2018 gubernatorial races.

960x0.jpg

AP Photo/Ted S. Warren, File

Take, for example, the candidates for governor from both major parties who held press conferences to discuss ending cannabis prohibition in the past week.

On Monday, New York Republican gubernatorial hopeful Joel Giambra unveiled a proposal to legalize marijuana and use the resulting tax revenue to fund subway repairs and other transportation projects.

"I think that legalizing marijuana and using the revenues to create an infrastructure fund to deal with these problems is a much more appropriate way to solve our problems than raising new taxes," he said.



And in Illinois, Democrat JB Pritzker spoke about the benefits of ending cannabis criminalization and taxing its sales before an assembled group of reporters on Friday.

"Criminalizing marijuana hasn’t made our communities safer. What it’s done is disproportionately impact black and brown communities," he said. "The criminalization of cannabis never has been and never will be enforced fairly, and it’s time to bring that to an end."

The two candidates' vocal support for legalization highlights how marijuana is poised to play a more prominent role in many of the nation's 36 races for state governorships this year.

Democratic and GOP Candidates in Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Wisconsin and other states have all backed some form of marijuana law reform, ranging from full legalization to allowing medical cannabis.

In California, Colorado, Maine and other states that have already enacted legalization, gubernatorial contenders are vowing to stand up to potential attacks on their cannabis laws by the Trump administration. If elected, they may have to follow through on those pledges, as U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions this month rescinded Obama-era guidance that has generally allowed states to implement their own marijuana laws without federal interference.

Cannabis played a central role in the nation's two 2017 gubernatorial races.

New Jersey's Phil Murphy, a Democrat who was sworn in as governor on Tuesday, campaigned on legalization, often touting the tax revenue that could be generated from legal cannabis sales.

In Virginia, new Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam, made marijuana decriminalization a centerpiece of his campaign, often describing the issue in stark racial justice terms.

The two are now expected to shepherd those promised cannabis reforms to enactment.

Gubernatorial races are just one lens through which to view the rapidly evolving politics of marijuana. Polling from major firms like Gallup, Pew and Quinnipiac shows that a growing majority of U.S. voters now supports legalization.

U.S. House Senate candidates and 2020 presidential contenders are also staking out far-reaching marijuana reform stances, something that would have seemed unimaginable just a few election cycles ago. For decades, cannabis was seen as a marginalized third-rail of politics that was dangerous to discuss lest candidates be attacked as "soft on crime."

But those perceptions have changed as voters themselves have taken matters into their own hands and strongly approved marijuana ballot measures, demonstrating that legalization is a winning issue.

While it is by no means certain that challengers like New York's Giambra or Illinois's Pritzker will win their parties' nominations -- let alone unseat anti-legalization incumbent governors of opposite parties who are running for reelection in November -- the fact that they are proactively calling press conferences to tout their cannabis law reform credentials shows that marijuana has arrived squarely at the forefront of mainstream American politics.

A number of states are expected to pass bills or ballot measures legalizing marijuana or allowing medical cannabis this year.

Tom Angell publishes Marijuana Moment news and founded the nonprofit Marijuana Majority. Follow Tom on Twitter for breaking news and subscribe to his daily newsletter.
 
Cannabis businesses in western states ask Congress for protection

By The Associated Press

SEATTLE — A group representing marijuana business owners in the West is urging Congress to include language in a government spending bill that would protect cannabis operations.

The Western Regional Cannabis Business Alliance said Tuesday it is asking for legislative protection after Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ signaled a tougher approach to federal marijuana enforcement. Earlier this month Sessions said he was ending an Obama-era policy that kept federal authorities from cracking down on the pot trade in states where the drug is legal.

Related stories
The marijuana business group wants lawmakers to include language in an appropriations bill that would prohibit the Justice Department from spending money to thwart marijuana businesses in states where it is legal. The Western Regional Cannabis Business Alliance represents marijuana businesses in Washington, Oregon, Alaska, Hawaii, Montana and Arizona.

Related: Nearly 70 Congress members push spending bill amendment to protect state-legal marijuana
 
20 state attorneys general back Colo. Rep. Ed Perlmutter’s marijuana banking bill


Update January 17: The Associated Press reports that Maine Attorney General Janet Mills says she is joining the group of attorneys general, bringing the group’s total to 20. She says the federal government has a responsibility to “bring its practices in line with the states that have seen fit to legalize marijuana.”

A bill introduced by Colorado Rep. Ed Perlmutter that would allow banks to serve marijuana-related businesses without fear of penalties from the federal government got a boost Tuesday from a bipartisan coalition of state attorneys general.

A letter sent to leaders in Congress Tuesday by 19 state attorneys general requests advancement of legislation such as the Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act to “provide a safe harbor” for banks that provide financial products or services to state-legal marijuana businesses.

The recent rescission by U.S. Attorney General Jeff Session of Obama-era guidance for the U.S. Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) regarding banks doing business with marijuana firms has made the need for Congressional action more urgent, the attorneys general said.

Enacting laws such as the SAFE Banking Act that ensure accountability in the marijuana industry would, “bring billions of dollars into the banking sector, and give law enforcement the ability to monitor these transactions,” the attorneys general said. “Moreover, compliance with tax requirements would be simpler and easier to enforce with a better-defined tracking of funds.”

Related stories
Democrat Perlmutter introduced the SAFE Banking Act last April with co-sponsors Reps. Denny Heck, D-Washington, and Don Young, R-Alaska. Colorado Sens. Michael Bennet and Cory Gardner announced their sponsorship of a Senate companion bill last May. The House bill, which currently has 64 co-sponsors, is a reintroduction of the Marijuana Businesses Access to Banking Act, which was first introduced in 2013 — and again in 2015 — but subsequently languished.

“I first introduced this legislation in 2013 to get cash off the streets and reduce the threat of crime, robbery and assault in our communities,” Perlmutter said in an email to The Cannabist. “Voters have spoken on this issue and voted to legalize some form of marijuana in nearly every state in the country. States are taking responsible steps to regulate the industry and we must ensure that includes access to the banking system.”

The attorneys general from seven of the eight states that have legalized recreational marijuana signed the letter.

Congress must take legislative actions to allow legal marijuana businesses access to banking services, Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman said in a statement.

“Opening a bank account is often one of the first steps a new business takes, but given the currently outdated federal banking laws, the multi-billion dollar legal marijuana industry is forced to remain in the financial shadows running cash-only businesses,” she said. “I urge Congress to take the necessary action to bring that commerce into the banking system, which will address certain public safety concerns, and allow law enforcement, regulators and taxing authorities to better monitor these businesses.”

In the aftermath of Sessions’ shift on marijuana policy, the Republican — who is also running for governor — had previously said she would continue to defend state laws and encouraged Coloradans “not to freak out.”

Cannabis banking is an issue impacting both red and blue states, California Democratic Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement. After legalizing recreational marijuana on Jan. 1, the nation’s most populous state is moving forward, not backwards when it comes to the cannabis industry, he said.

“The future of small and local licensed businesses has been clouded by the Trump Administration’s relentless attacks on progress, in conflict with the will of voters,” Becerra said. “Congress has the power to protect a growing $6.7 billion industry and the public safety of our communities.”

Related: California’s new attorney general gearing up to defend legal weed

Notably absent from the letter was the signature of Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt, a Republican who is also running for governor and was opposed to the Nevada marijuana legalization initiative known as Question 2 before the state’s voters approved it in November 2016.

Perlmutter’s SAFE Banking Act is the latest marijuana-related measure in the U.S. House of Representatives to see increased support since Sessions rescinded the Cole Memo guidance on federal marijuana enforcement.

Nearly 70 congress members signed a letter sent Friday asking House leadership to include Colorado Rep. Jared Polis’ McClintock-Polis Amendment in any forthcoming appropriations legislation. That amendment would ensure Department of Justice funds cannot be used to interfere with states that have authorized some form of marijuana legalization.
 

Sponsored by

VGoodiez 420EDC
Back
Top