What's new

Feds Haven't Weighed in on Washington, Colorado Pot Legalization

Hash Zeppelin

Ski Bum Rodeo Clown
Premium user
ICMag Donor
Veteran
http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/2012/11/18/feds_havent_weighed_in_on_washington.htm

Feds Haven't Weighed in on Washington, Colorado Pot Legalization

Nov. 18, 2012

Peter Hecht, The Sacramento Bee

In October 2010, with a quixotic marijuana initiative leading in California polls, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder answered an urgent letter from retired heads of the federal Drug Enforcement Administration.

"Let me state clearly that the Department of Justice strongly opposes Proposition 19," Holder wrote, declaring he would "vigorously enforce" federal law if California voters passed the measure, which would have legalized recreational marijuana use for adults over 21 and allowed retail sales of pot.

This year, Holder notably declined to respond as the retired DEA administrators sent him another anxious letter expressing opposition to marijuana legalization efforts. This time, voters in two states, Washington and Colorado, voted 55 percent to 45 percent to legalize marijuana beyond medical use, upping the stakes in America's marijuana debate.

California, which passed America's first medical marijuana initiative in 1996 and pushed the envelope on legalization in 2010, has become an also-ran in the discussion. The state also lags in regulation of medical cannibis.

"It feels like you guys are still going through the awkward step of adolescence, and Colorado and Washington have gone on to the next step," said Sam Kamin, a professor at the University of Denver's Sturm College of Law who researches marijuana policy.

In California, where Holder's letter was widely publicized and flipped the polls as Proposition 19 went down to defeat, marijuana advocates hope successful legalization votes elsewhere will at least persuade the Legislature to regulate the state's existing medical marijuana industry, which operates in an amorphous legal haze.

"This is called a game-changer," said Ellen Komp, California deputy director for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. The group backed failed legislation this year to license California medical marijuana dispensaries and growers in hopes that stricter state oversight would help repel an ongoing federal crackdown.

"No one thought we were going to get a full legalization measure anywhere ... Now everyone is waiting to see what the federal response will be in Colorado and Washington."

Don Duncan is the California director of Americans for Safe Access, an advocacy group for medical marijuana users. He said the developments in Colorado and Washington may make it easier to persuade California lawmakers -- who have been wary of being seen as champions for marijuana stores -- to set rules for the state's medical cannabis industry when a new bill is introduced in January.

"I'm guardedly optimistic this changes the landscape in our favor," Duncan said. "We're not the most radical people at the table anymore."

The four U.S. attorneys in California have been systematically cracking down on the state's medical marijuana businesses, contending that many are cash-reaping enterprises profiteering in violation of both the federal Controlled Substances Act and state medical marijuana laws, which require pot operations to be nonprofit.

In an interview this week, Sacramento U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wagner said the votes in Washington and Colorado won't have any immediate impact on federal enforcement efforts in California.

"In the short term, I don't think it's going to have much effect on what we're doing here in California," Wagner said. "We're not really in the business of trying to shape state legislation or state policy. We're in the business of enforcing federal law, and so long as conditions in California stay the same, our enforcement efforts are going to be pretty much the same."

Federal officials have said little so far about how they will respond to legalization of recreational marijuana sales and use in Colorado and Washington.

Compared with California -- where Wagner has called the medical marijuana industry an "unregulated free-for-all" -- federal crackdowns on medical marijuana outlets in Colorado have been considerably more restrained. That is credited in large part to Colorado's efforts to strictly regulate its medical marijuana market.

Medical marijuana workers in Colorado must be licensed by the state. All transactions and shipments are videotaped, and a state policing agency -- the Colorado Medical Marijuana Enforcement Bureau -- oversees the industry.

Kamin, the University of Denver professor, said the perceived success of Colorado's medical marijuana regulatory oversight made it easier for voters there to sanction the use of marijuana as a purely pleasurable pursuit for adults.

"Everything is already in place with regulations we can cut and paste. And we know it works," Kamin said.

Analysts say voter demographics also played a role. Unlike in California, where Proposition 19 lost by 53.5 percent to 46.5 percent in 2010, the Colorado and Washington measures played out during a presidential election year with a more diverse electorate, including a strong turnout among young voters.

Colorado was a presidential swing state -- a factor advocates suggest may have dissuaded President Barack Obama's attorney general, Holder, from weighing in this time around.

"I think it's safe to say that there were politics involved," said Brian Vicente, co-director of the Amendment 64 campaign. "Marijuana is demonstrably more popular in Colorado than President Obama."

The president won Colorado -- but the pot measure got a greater share of the state vote.

Marijuana advocates in Washington and Colorado said they learned from the defeat of California's Proposition 19. The two victorious measures added provisions for state regulation of recreational sales -- and the first-ever standards for testing drivers for pot impairment.

"This is a maturation of the discussion on marijuana," said Allison Holcomb, director of the New Approach Washington campaign that passed the legalization measure. "It changed the dynamic of the conversation altogether."
 

Puffaluffagus

Member
Veteran
I honestly think the feds aren't going to do anything.
They will bust a few people who are in flagrant violation of the new laws, but for the most part I think they are just going to let it ride.

There haven't been any major outcries in the media about it, Seattle police released a light hearted guide to the new laws, and the general attitude/reaction to the new laws has been overwhelmingly positive.

I think they are here to stay, with more states to follow.
 

watts

ohms
Veteran
wait till the money starts rolling in. They'll be busting doors down and saying something then
 
S

SeaMaiden

I think Holder isn't going to do anything because I believe he's part of the changing of the guard that will occur after Obama takes his oath in January.

But what this article helped me see in a different perspective is just how California may have played a role in the legalization that has occurred in other states, as well as the regulation. I hadn't considered things from that perspective before. I am simultaneously more than annoyed, downright pissed off, to think that retired DEA men think they can dictate to the rest of us. Gentlemen, that is not what this nation was founded upon, and I'll not quietly allow you to try to change that.

I assume this article was written by Peter Hecht himself? If so, good, because it's been a while, I'd stopped checking so often.

Anyone else here watch Boardwalk Empire? I need to watch it from the beginning, but I've got a friend who, every time we talk about MMJ and legalization, says I should watch it. I saw an episode last night and they had a BRUTALLY graphic scene of violence that I couldn't watch. But I also know--that's how it was. And in some places that's how it IS. Which reminds me that I have lived a blessed life.
 

Hash Zeppelin

Ski Bum Rodeo Clown
Premium user
ICMag Donor
Veteran
^I am hoping Obama is thinking that he will cook up a federal legalization bill to get us to stfu so he can focus on other stuff.

Lets use the "Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?" tactic like annoying children on a trip with parents. If they want to treat us like kids lets bug them until they brake down and give up.
 

gaiusmarius

me
Veteran
to be honest i'm surprised we haven't had a statement from the feds telling people how fed law trumps state nananabubu kinda thing. was thinking it would come after the election some time. but so far nothing, which is very interesting in it's self. by saying nothing they are conceding the states right in a way. it's definitely an amazing moment in cannabis history. the personal use aspect isn't even in their jurisdiction so that's probably here to stay, same with the 6 plants personal in Colorado. when the whole stores and licensed grows start up then we will probably see a reaction. would be awesome if they just accept the peoples will for once.
 

MIway

Registered User
Veteran
They might be putting the pieces in place for our next military action... Busy, busy, busy. Plenty of time to open the domestic fronts anyway.
 

Stranger

Member
I see silence as endorsement.

That still doesn't solve the financial issues. No banks and the IRS. Those two issues are the eye of the needle and really keep things from growing like they should.

Its like a ph problem, locking out some vital nutes.


IMHO.


Frigging amazing times for cannabis.

If it gets de-scheduled or rescheduled that would be pretty awesome too, many problems solved.
 

pip313

Member
If it goes "unchecked" do you think it will be on the national ballot in 2016?I won't lie, I like it illegal it pays the bills. I sell in compliance with michigan law but value is based off fed law.
 

gaiusmarius

me
Veteran
there is interesting news on the financial aspect too, just read a thread by Payaso where they talk about offering accounts for cannabis businesses with CC payment etc. think it's in the cannabis news section.
 

whodare

Active member
Veteran
to be honest i'm surprised we haven't had a statement from the feds telling people how fed law trumps state nananabubu kinda thing. was thinking it would come after the election some time. but so far nothing, which is very interesting in it's self. by saying nothing they are conceding the states right in a way. it's definitely an amazing moment in cannabis history. the personal use aspect isn't even in their jurisdiction so that's probably here to stay, same with the 6 plants personal in Colorado. when the whole stores and licensed grows start up then we will probably see a reaction. would be awesome if they just accept the peoples will for once.

I think do to world tension level, and general bad state of things, the Feds are going to have to start conceding certain little things, ya know to keep the people distracted and excited for a while.
 

Stranger

Member
If it goes "unchecked" do you think it will be on the national ballot in 2016?I won't lie, I like it illegal it pays the bills. I sell in compliance with michigan law but value is based off fed law.

Don't know about any national ballot, but I think value is in the bud.

Its not easy to produce good regularly available bud. For many here it is second nature (or after years of practice), but Joe Blow will find out in a hurry, a few lights and a seed is not even close to what I see being served. Not even.
The cure, the effects, the tastes, its a combination that has to be right. Sure, some wont care and be obsessed like we are, but many will. The right customers will.

How many brew their own beer, wine, whiskey and or grow tobacco? These all are crafts, and journeymen will always have work and be paid properly.

What else would you ever want to do if you have to "work"?


************

I seriously hope I am proven 100% wrong and on my block we have massive harvest parties and dank is available by just asking my next door neighbor. ( Excuse me could I get a dab? I'm a bit low). People on this site are a different breed and are enthusiasts. Most earth people don't have the desire or are too busy to even cook dinner regularly. Thanks for not attacking me, its just my own opinion in my part of the backwoods.

Still have my NGB Box w two 150's and first - Nirvana Cali Orange breeder pack too!

Peace

************
 
Last edited:

minds_I

Active member
Veteran
Don't know about any national ballot, but I think value is in the bud.

Its not easy to produce good regularly available bud. For many here it is second nature (or after years of practice), but Joe Blow will find out in a hurry, a few lights and a seed is not even close to what I see being served. Not even.
The cure, the effects, the tastes, its a combination that has to be right. Sure, some wont care and be obsessed like we are, but many will. The right customers will.

How many brew their own beer, wine, whiskey and or grow tobacco? These all are crafts, and journeymen will always have work and be paid properly.

What else would you ever want to do if you have to "work"?

Hello all,

I respectfully disagree, I have consumed cannabis for a handful of decades and I just started to grow for myself in 05'. Since that day I have not purchased or sought out any bud or have been apart of any market (except the garden center). The very first crop I harvested was the best bud ever (due to my involvement I think). The high was spectacular and they looked better then any street weed.

This last season outdoors I grew enough buds to personally last me till next Christmas all in about 10 minutes a day of actual care. This was a 3 plant grow in an organic mix.

The hardest part was trimming and perhaps spraying with Greenscure...so maybe its just me but I do not see the hard work folks are talking about.

As for how many people grow their own tobacco...I do, its cannabis. As for beer...it is cheaper to buy it then make it for myself and there is the convenience is'nt there that fetches a higher price.

As for whisky...well, you can't replicate a good Kentucky sour mash (and others have tried) at home IMO.

minds_I

PS. I started with a 250w HPS, a KGB style growbox and Nirvana seeds and have never been without buds since 05'.
 

DocCrow

Member
Don't know about any national ballot, but I think value is in the bud.

Its not easy to produce good regularly available bud. For many here it is second nature (or after years of practice), but Joe Blow will find out in a hurry, a few lights and a seed is not even close to what I see being served. Not even.
The cure, the effects, the tastes, its a combination that has to be right. Sure, some wont care and be obsessed like we are, but many will. The right customers will.

How many brew their own beer, wine, whiskey and or grow tobacco? These all are crafts, and journeymen will always have work and be paid properly.

What else would you ever want to do if you have to "work"?

I completely agree 100% with everything you just said.

DC
 

vta

Active member
Veteran
obama-weed-5-29-10-2.jpg



Obama and the Marijuana Legalization Initiatives


by Ethan Nadelmann




On Election Day, Washington State and Colorado became the first two states in the country -- and indeed the first political jurisdictions anywhere in the world -- to approve legally regulating marijuana like alcohol.


It would be a mistake to call these ballot initiative victories "pro-pot." Most of those who voted in favor don't use marijuana; indeed many don't like it at all and have never used it. What moved them was the realization that it made more sense to regulate, tax and control marijuana than to keep wasting money and resources trying to enforce an unenforceable prohibition.


Whether or not the two state governments move forward with regulating marijuana like alcohol will depend on two things: how the Obama administration, federal prosecutors and police agencies respond; and the extent to which the states' senior elected officials commit to implementing the will of the people. The fact that federal laws explicitly criminalize marijuana transactions, and that the federal government can continue to enforce those laws, means that federal authorities could effectively block the initiatives from being fully implemented. But there are also good reasons why the Obama administration should, and may, allow state governments to proceed as voters have demanded.


First, keep in mind that no one needs to do anything right away. The provisions legalizing personal possession of up to an ounce of marijuana, and (in the case of Colorado) also allowing the cultivation of up to six plants in the privacy of one's home, will become state law once the initiatives are certified in coming weeks. But those provisions, while contrary to federal law, are unlikely to excite the attentions of federal authorities, who will be more concerned with how the states propose to regulate larger scale production and distribution. The Colorado government, however, has until July 1, and the Washington State government until the end of next year, to issue a statewide regulatory plan. That affords plenty of time for consultation and dialogue.


Second, senior state officials, including Colorado's Governor Hickenlooper and Attorney General Suthers, as well as Washington's newly elected governor, Jay Inslee, and attorney general, Bob Ferguson, have all said that they will work to uphold the new laws, notwithstanding their pre-Election Day opposition. The two incoming officials in Washington may also be moved by the fact that the marijuana reform initiative garnered more votes than either of them did.


Third, whereas Attorney General Eric Holder warned California voters in October 2010 that the federal government would not allow the marijuana legalization initiative on the ballot at the time to be implemented if it won (which it did not), no such warning was forthcoming this year. Former drug czars and DEA chiefs banded together to urge Holder to speak out again, but both he and President Obama remained silent, perhaps influenced by polls showing strong support for marijuana legalization among young and independent voters in the swing state of Colorado and elsewhere.


Fourth, the Obama administration's actions, vis a vis the 18 states that have legalized medical marijuana, offers important insights. Federal prosecutors have acted most aggressively in those states, like Montana and California, which failed to adopt statewide regulation of the emerging industry, and have exercised the greatest restraint in places like New Mexico, Maine and Colorado, where state government is deeply engaged. President Obama has not entirely reneged on the pledge he made as a candidate in 2008, and reiterated as president in 2009, that the federal government would refrain from prosecuting medical marijuana providers operating legally under state law. He has the authority to declare a similar policy of restraint regarding the new laws in Colorado and Washington.


Fifth, in my conversations with foreign leaders, major Democratic Party donors and senior political advisers who have discussed drug policy with the president over the past year, all say that Obama seems inclined to pursue further reform of drug policies in a second term. Nothing dramatic, to be sure, but there's a sense that he and those close to him get it -- and will say and do things in a second term that they didn't during the first.


Will federal prosecutors and police agents continue to repeat the mantra that "it's all illegal under federal law" and that the federal Controlled Substances Act trumps all state laws? Yes, of course. But they're up against a powerful host of arguments that also demand deference. These new laws were passed by voter initiatives, which represent the clearest expressions of the will of the people. The final tallies were consistent with public opinion polls earlier in the year, before anyone had spent a penny on political advertising. Voters clearly knew what they were voting for.


Effectively implemented, the new laws could offer fiscal benefits in terms of reducing criminal justice costs and increasing tax revenues, public safety benefits in terms of transforming a criminal, underground market into a legally regulated above-ground part of local economies, and public health benefits in terms of regulating the quality and potency of substances consumed by millions of Americans. They also, it must be said, advance the cause of freedom.


"It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system," Justice Louis D. Brandeis wrote (in dissent) in 1932, "that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country." Not one but two courageous states have chosen to serve in this way. President Obama should do everything in his power to allow them to do it right.


Ethan Nadelmann is the founder and executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance.
 

dddaver

Active member
Veteran
I dunno, a lot of the times I would do something so defiant my mother would be speechless...... right before she would smack me in the face. lol

Bwahahah. Very good analogy. But the last time my mother took a swing at me, I ducked, and she nailed my sister who was standing next to me, who started wailing...So everybody, get ready to duck.

It's a shame somebody has to get hit, but I think, historically as has ALWAYS been the case, something freaky this way comes. SSDD.
 

Hash Zeppelin

Ski Bum Rodeo Clown
Premium user
ICMag Donor
Veteran
hahahha

my mother graduated from smacking, to throwing heavy objects, and guilt tripping me with "Ya just like Ya Fatha! Gad Dammit. ahh look what you made me say". lol

big
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top