4 ms·

Congress is going to do diddly squat about legalization while the GOP runs the place.

cryptonector 9y ago
You say that. I'm not so sure, and I'll make no predictions. But when the Republican Congress decriminalizes marijuana ahead of the mid-terms, I'll be back to check what you have to say then. I think these guys have the power to think outside the box and surprise you. I agree with grandparent that Sessions' action will tend to increase pressure for federal decrim., and that might even be Sessions' (and/or President Trump's) goal. What would the effect of Federal decriminalization be on the mid-terms? Don't you think it would help Republicans? Do you think they don't think so? Of course they think so. I don't know if it will pass, but my guess is that a reasonable bill would decriminalize marijuana possession and trade, but would keep it illegal for interstate commerce (this would be a sop to those States that want to keep it criminalized). Sort of like the 21st Amendment, but as a statute. Such a compromise would help Republicans in States where legalization is popular and... would not hurt them in States where it is not. It would also help with the federalist types. This should all be blindingly obvious. The only reason I wouldn't make a prediction is that Republicans sure know how to shoot their feet off.
- throwawayjava 9y ago
  > But when the Republican Congress decriminalizes marijuana ahead of the mid-terms With what votes, and what leadership? The entirety of the GOP house leadership opposes any form of legal cannabis. Messer, the policy committee chair, even opposes medical cannabis for vets prescribed by their VA doctor and residing in states where medical cannabis is legal. Concretely, which GOP representatives do you think will vote for decriminalization? I'm incredulous, but curious to hear a rational argument that this is a remotely reasonable expectation.
  - cryptonector 9y ago
    I can't make a "rational argument" about what people I don't know might do. I am saying that it's very much in their interest and that I would not be surprised if they do it. How about we check in here again when it happens / fails to happen?
    - anigbrowl 9y ago
      Just because they have a rational interest tells you nothing about the probability. It's a little rude to throw out a bold claim ('when the Republican Congress decriminalizes marijuana ahead of the mid-terms' as if that were highly probable) and then suggest tabling the discussion when you get refuted. Sure, if you think they should do it, totally valid opinion. Talking as they are going to implies knowing something that everyone else doesn't, which is why you're being challenged about it.
    - dpc59 9y ago
      You could say I'd have a rational interest in becoming a doctor because I'd stand to make on average 300k a year. I won't do it for other reasons which aren't pondered. It's easy to make something look rational when you pick and choose axioms. The republicans don't have a rational interest in decriminalization because their financial backers don't want it, and they have moral qualms about it since 100 years of government lies convinced them it's the devil's plant.
- wfo 9y ago
  The theory that a party that has consistently screamed bloody murder for the last 60 years about anything that even smells like toning down the war on drugs or carceral state is somehow playing 1000 dimensional political chess and cracking down on drugs because of their secret plan to legalize them is... well, how do I put this... wildly speculative? Do you think your theory is really more likely than this being Sessions simply doing exactly what he's explicitly said he has wanted to do every single moment of his entire adult life, crack down on people who use pot? Crushing states where pot is legal will lose them the most heavily blue seats that they would never win anyway, but why should they care? It will give their base what they say they want whenever you ask them, the thing that they want most, that drives them to the polls. It is an assault in a culture war against the smug, pot-smoking coastal elites and despised pot-smoking minorities, hippies, college kids. Perhaps they see the drug war for what it is, for how it was designed: not a war on drugs, but a war on the demographic groups of people who tend to use them. And that's why they support it. At best, I'd see them allowing a vote on it then let their vulnerable reps in purple/blue states vote yes but make sure it fails anyway: "I'm on your side, I promise, see, I tried".
briandear 9y ago
Let's be fair here. How much did Democrats do when they controlled the House, Senate and White House? These arguments are popular when someone's preferred party is out of power, but reality is that there is a bipartisan opposition and bipartisan support for legalization. About 28% of Democrats oppose legalization, while 30% of Republicans support legalization. The numbers are actually fascinating. [1] For example, Hillary Clinton was all over the 1994 crime bill that her husband signed into law -- with a Democrat Congress (Republicans didn't actually take the majority until Jan 1995 after sweeping the 1994 midterm elections.[2] She promoted the law, she supported it. She even famously called African American young men "super predators" -- while stumping for Bill Clinton on the 1996 campaign trail. That super predators line came when Hillary was trumpeting the success of the 1994 crime bill. [3] So to imply that "Congress is going to do diddly squat about legalization while the GOP runs the place" -- that's intellectually dishonest. And the reason I mention Hillary Clinton is because the implication with these sorts of comments is that Democrats would legalize if Trump and the GOP weren't in power. Since Hillary was the alternative, her background is very relevant. [1] http://iop.harvard.edu/survey/details/political-issue-marijuana http://iop.harvard.edu/survey/details/political-issue-mariju... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/15/bill-clinton-crime-bill-hillary-black-lives-thomas-frank https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/15/bill-c... [3] http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/aug/28/reince-priebus/did-hillary-clinton-call-african-american-youth-su/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/aug/...
- notfromhere 9y ago
  Dems haven't had a filibuster-proof majority in decades, and spent all their capital during the obama years on healthcare reform. Legal weed wasn't happening back then. If Clinton was president, they would have most likely kept the Obama-era policy rather than reverse it after multiple states voted for legalization

You say that. I'm not so sure, and I'll make no predictions. But when the Republican Congress decriminalizes marijuana ahead of the mid-terms, I'll be back to check what you have to say then. I think these guys have the power to think outside the box and surprise you. I agree with grandparent that Sessions' action will tend to increase pressure for federal decrim., and that might even be Sessions' (and/or President Trump's) goal. What would the effect of Federal decriminalization be on the mid-terms? Don't you think it would help Republicans? Do you think they don't think so? Of course they think so. I don't know if it will pass, but my guess is that a reasonable bill would decriminalize marijuana possession and trade, but would keep it illegal for interstate commerce (this would be a sop to those States that want to keep it criminalized). Sort of like the 21st Amendment, but as a statute. Such a compromise would help Republicans in States where legalization is popular and... would not hurt them in States where it is not. It would also help with the federalist types. This should all be blindingly obvious. The only reason I wouldn't make a prediction is that Republicans sure know how to shoot their feet off.

throwawayjava 9y ago
> But when the Republican Congress decriminalizes marijuana ahead of the mid-terms With what votes, and what leadership? The entirety of the GOP house leadership opposes any form of legal cannabis. Messer, the policy committee chair, even opposes medical cannabis for vets prescribed by their VA doctor and residing in states where medical cannabis is legal. Concretely, which GOP representatives do you think will vote for decriminalization? I'm incredulous, but curious to hear a rational argument that this is a remotely reasonable expectation.
- cryptonector 9y ago
  I can't make a "rational argument" about what people I don't know might do. I am saying that it's very much in their interest and that I would not be surprised if they do it. How about we check in here again when it happens / fails to happen?
  - anigbrowl 9y ago
    Just because they have a rational interest tells you nothing about the probability. It's a little rude to throw out a bold claim ('when the Republican Congress decriminalizes marijuana ahead of the mid-terms' as if that were highly probable) and then suggest tabling the discussion when you get refuted. Sure, if you think they should do it, totally valid opinion. Talking as they are going to implies knowing something that everyone else doesn't, which is why you're being challenged about it.
  - dpc59 9y ago
    You could say I'd have a rational interest in becoming a doctor because I'd stand to make on average 300k a year. I won't do it for other reasons which aren't pondered. It's easy to make something look rational when you pick and choose axioms. The republicans don't have a rational interest in decriminalization because their financial backers don't want it, and they have moral qualms about it since 100 years of government lies convinced them it's the devil's plant.
wfo 9y ago
The theory that a party that has consistently screamed bloody murder for the last 60 years about anything that even smells like toning down the war on drugs or carceral state is somehow playing 1000 dimensional political chess and cracking down on drugs because of their secret plan to legalize them is... well, how do I put this... wildly speculative? Do you think your theory is really more likely than this being Sessions simply doing exactly what he's explicitly said he has wanted to do every single moment of his entire adult life, crack down on people who use pot? Crushing states where pot is legal will lose them the most heavily blue seats that they would never win anyway, but why should they care? It will give their base what they say they want whenever you ask them, the thing that they want most, that drives them to the polls. It is an assault in a culture war against the smug, pot-smoking coastal elites and despised pot-smoking minorities, hippies, college kids. Perhaps they see the drug war for what it is, for how it was designed: not a war on drugs, but a war on the demographic groups of people who tend to use them. And that's why they support it. At best, I'd see them allowing a vote on it then let their vulnerable reps in purple/blue states vote yes but make sure it fails anyway: "I'm on your side, I promise, see, I tried".

briandear 9y ago

Let's be fair here. How much did Democrats do when they controlled the House, Senate and White House? These arguments are popular when someone's preferred party is out of power, but reality is that there is a bipartisan opposition and bipartisan support for legalization. About 28% of Democrats oppose legalization, while 30% of Republicans support legalization. The numbers are actually fascinating. [1] For example, Hillary Clinton was all over the 1994 crime bill that her husband signed into law -- with a Democrat Congress (Republicans didn't actually take the majority until Jan 1995 after sweeping the 1994 midterm elections.[2] She promoted the law, she supported it. She even famously called African American young men "super predators" -- while stumping for Bill Clinton on the 1996 campaign trail. That super predators line came when Hillary was trumpeting the success of the 1994 crime bill. [3] So to imply that "Congress is going to do diddly squat about legalization while the GOP runs the place" -- that's intellectually dishonest. And the reason I mention Hillary Clinton is because the implication with these sorts of comments is that Democrats would legalize if Trump and the GOP weren't in power. Since Hillary was the alternative, her background is very relevant. [1] http://iop.harvard.edu/survey/details/political-issue-marijuana http://iop.harvard.edu/survey/details/political-issue-mariju... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/15/bill-clinton-crime-bill-hillary-black-lives-thomas-frank https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/15/bill-c... [3] http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/aug/28/reince-priebus/did-hillary-clinton-call-african-american-youth-su/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/aug/...

notfromhere 9y ago
Dems haven't had a filibuster-proof majority in decades, and spent all their capital during the obama years on healthcare reform. Legal weed wasn't happening back then. If Clinton was president, they would have most likely kept the Obama-era policy rather than reverse it after multiple states voted for legalization