5 ms·

Given the amount of profits and taxes raised through cannabis legalization, and the volume of voters who want it, only the most narrowly focused, dogmatic polit

Given the amount of profits and taxes raised through cannabis legalization, and the volume of voters who want it, only the most narrowly focused, dogmatic politician seems to oppose legalization. Full legalization is coming, one way or another, and states opposing it are only hurting themselves.

SketchySeaBeast 1y ago
I'm not familiar with the texas government, but doesn't the fact that it ended up on the governor's desk mean that the "narrowly focused, dogmatic" politicians run the two chambers?
- rco8786 1y ago
  > I'm not familiar with the texas government > the "narrowly focused, dogmatic" politicians run the two chambers? Yes. This is VERY Texas. The state government is 100% conservative republican. "Texas is a majority Republican state with Republicans controlling every statewide office.[1] Texas Republicans have majorities in the State House and Senate, an entirely Republican Texas Supreme Court, control of both Senate seats in the US Congress." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Texas#:~:text=Texas%20is%20a%20majority%20Republican,America's%20most%2Dpopulous%20Republican%20state. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Texas#:~:text=Texa...
  - SketchySeaBeast 1y ago
    So I guess I struggle with the idea that it's a thin slice of dogmatic legislators, when it seems that the majority of the state's legislators are still against THC.
    - beedeebeedee 1y ago
      Both can be true. Dogmatic legislators get voted into office along party lines, but they are not representative of the actual beliefs of most Texans (they appeal to what a lot of Texans think they should believe, but don't actually when it comes to lived reality). On this issue, the governor is aware that a lot of Texans would be in an uproar if they can no longer buy THC legally. This includes veterans and business owners who are considered special classes by the governor. I deeply dislike Abbott, but on this occasion, I think he did the right thing.
  - StefanBatory 1y ago
    How do you do that highlight on Wiki? Is it just via URL or is there a handy way to share a link like that?
    - sjsdaiuasgdia 1y ago
      In Chrome, the right click context menu has a "Copy link to highlight" option. It'll add the appropriate stuff to the URL to highlight what you've selected and put it in your clipboard.
      - StefanBatory 1y ago
        Thank you!
- dingnuts 1y ago
  I'm familiar with Texas gov. given the amount of power the Lt Gov has in Texas, since he has the ability to unilaterally set the legislative agenda, it's really more like: Lt Gov Dan Patrick is obviously dogmatic given just the quotes in the article but yes, to answer your question
- sjsdaiuasgdia 1y ago
  Well, we are talking about the Texas state legislature. It is going to be prone to narrowly focused dogmatic politicians. There's some inertia. For a long time, being against cannabis legalization went hand in hand with being "tough on crime". A politician coming out in support of it ran a high chance of being called "soft on crime" by their opponents. There can also be a racial edge due to people who primarily see crime and cannabis as minority-driven problems.
- throw0101c 1y ago
  > I'm not familiar with the texas government, but doesn't the fact that it ended up on the governor's desk mean that the "narrowly focused, dogmatic" politicians run the two chambers? The legislature has a 'mandate' from the people because it was elected. The governor has a 'mandate' from the people because he was elected. Does one have more of a mandate than the other, or are they equal? What happens when they have different policies? This is one of the weakness of presidential systems: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_system#Efficiencies_and_inefficiencies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_system#Efficienci...
- recursivecaveat 1y ago
  I'm pretty sure often these things go forward because they are expected to fail. Your base and the single-issue voters notice and reward you for 'trying', but the general public does not really remember or care about that time 3 years ago you voted for a bill that never passed. Gives some flavors of brexit, which was not an expected or desired outcome by the PM who ultimately called the referendum.
- anon84873628 1y ago
  Sibling comments are trying to explain the "dogmatic" politicians but really they just took money from alcohol companies.
runako 1y ago
> Full legalization is coming, one way or another I used to think this, and it may be true in the very long run. However, the country is clearly in the midst of a long pivot backwards. The current backsliding has been going on for the better part of a decade, and there are no indications that it is near its end. I guess we'll see.
- thinkingtoilet 1y ago
  You are correct about our backslide, but rich white males like pot so I think it could move forward while other rights and laws are being reversed.
  - sjsdaiuasgdia 1y ago
    It's amazing how thorough a cross section of society I see when I visit weed stores. Every age, every race. "I just got out of bed" clothes and business suits. Work boots and high heels. In the last couple years, I've had several work conversations where someone off hand mentioned the edibles they took for a concert the previous weekend, or the weed vape they took camping, or some other personal life story involving weed. Not in a hushed private conversation, it's in the small talk before a meeting kicks off. It's become very normalized. Even 5 years ago I would be shocked at someone casually discussing their weed usage with coworkers. And the tax money. Oh boy the tax money.
    - thinkingtoilet 1y ago
      I agree. From day one of legalization, it wasn't a bunch of hippies at the dispensaries. It was people from all walks of life.
    - dzhiurgis 1y ago
      I like how in The Netherlands coffee shops you can actually smoke weed. Is that available in US? The shops I’ve visited in US were very high end, you get carded, etc. While in The Netherlands patrons seem to be pretty low class, occasionally borderline mental.
dylan604 1y ago
Texas will be the last state in the union to legalize. Last election, Dallas voters decided to decriminalize, and the governor sued to prevent that from happening. There's a chasm between legalize and banning. Banning would prevent the compassionate use that has already been allowed. This banning is a knee-jerk reaction to those that have found the loop hole carved out in the compassionate use limits still allow for enough THC that recreational use can still be achieved. Rather than restricting the loop hole to still require prescription, they instead want to ban out right
- abirch 1y ago
  I would be betting on Utah to be the last state to legalize (it was the first to ban).
  - dylan604 1y ago
    I don't have much familiarity with local Utah politics, so you could be right. However, I am familiar with the Texas local politics in how they are king of the gerrymander and plenty of other games where people like Karl Rove led the way.

SketchySeaBeast 1y ago

I'm not familiar with the texas government, but doesn't the fact that it ended up on the governor's desk mean that the "narrowly focused, dogmatic" politicians run the two chambers?

rco8786 1y ago
> I'm not familiar with the texas government > the "narrowly focused, dogmatic" politicians run the two chambers? Yes. This is VERY Texas. The state government is 100% conservative republican. "Texas is a majority Republican state with Republicans controlling every statewide office.[1] Texas Republicans have majorities in the State House and Senate, an entirely Republican Texas Supreme Court, control of both Senate seats in the US Congress." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Texas#:~:text=Texas%20is%20a%20majority%20Republican,America's%20most%2Dpopulous%20Republican%20state. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Texas#:~:text=Texa...
- SketchySeaBeast 1y ago
  So I guess I struggle with the idea that it's a thin slice of dogmatic legislators, when it seems that the majority of the state's legislators are still against THC.
  - beedeebeedee 1y ago
    Both can be true. Dogmatic legislators get voted into office along party lines, but they are not representative of the actual beliefs of most Texans (they appeal to what a lot of Texans think they should believe, but don't actually when it comes to lived reality). On this issue, the governor is aware that a lot of Texans would be in an uproar if they can no longer buy THC legally. This includes veterans and business owners who are considered special classes by the governor. I deeply dislike Abbott, but on this occasion, I think he did the right thing.
- StefanBatory 1y ago
  How do you do that highlight on Wiki? Is it just via URL or is there a handy way to share a link like that?
  - sjsdaiuasgdia 1y ago
    In Chrome, the right click context menu has a "Copy link to highlight" option. It'll add the appropriate stuff to the URL to highlight what you've selected and put it in your clipboard.
    - StefanBatory 1y ago
      Thank you!
dingnuts 1y ago
I'm familiar with Texas gov. given the amount of power the Lt Gov has in Texas, since he has the ability to unilaterally set the legislative agenda, it's really more like: Lt Gov Dan Patrick is obviously dogmatic given just the quotes in the article but yes, to answer your question
sjsdaiuasgdia 1y ago
Well, we are talking about the Texas state legislature. It is going to be prone to narrowly focused dogmatic politicians. There's some inertia. For a long time, being against cannabis legalization went hand in hand with being "tough on crime". A politician coming out in support of it ran a high chance of being called "soft on crime" by their opponents. There can also be a racial edge due to people who primarily see crime and cannabis as minority-driven problems.
throw0101c 1y ago
> I'm not familiar with the texas government, but doesn't the fact that it ended up on the governor's desk mean that the "narrowly focused, dogmatic" politicians run the two chambers? The legislature has a 'mandate' from the people because it was elected. The governor has a 'mandate' from the people because he was elected. Does one have more of a mandate than the other, or are they equal? What happens when they have different policies? This is one of the weakness of presidential systems: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_system#Efficiencies_and_inefficiencies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_system#Efficienci...
recursivecaveat 1y ago
I'm pretty sure often these things go forward because they are expected to fail. Your base and the single-issue voters notice and reward you for 'trying', but the general public does not really remember or care about that time 3 years ago you voted for a bill that never passed. Gives some flavors of brexit, which was not an expected or desired outcome by the PM who ultimately called the referendum.
anon84873628 1y ago
Sibling comments are trying to explain the "dogmatic" politicians but really they just took money from alcohol companies.

runako 1y ago

> Full legalization is coming, one way or another I used to think this, and it may be true in the very long run. However, the country is clearly in the midst of a long pivot backwards. The current backsliding has been going on for the better part of a decade, and there are no indications that it is near its end. I guess we'll see.

thinkingtoilet 1y ago
You are correct about our backslide, but rich white males like pot so I think it could move forward while other rights and laws are being reversed.
- sjsdaiuasgdia 1y ago
  It's amazing how thorough a cross section of society I see when I visit weed stores. Every age, every race. "I just got out of bed" clothes and business suits. Work boots and high heels. In the last couple years, I've had several work conversations where someone off hand mentioned the edibles they took for a concert the previous weekend, or the weed vape they took camping, or some other personal life story involving weed. Not in a hushed private conversation, it's in the small talk before a meeting kicks off. It's become very normalized. Even 5 years ago I would be shocked at someone casually discussing their weed usage with coworkers. And the tax money. Oh boy the tax money.
  - thinkingtoilet 1y ago
    I agree. From day one of legalization, it wasn't a bunch of hippies at the dispensaries. It was people from all walks of life.
  - dzhiurgis 1y ago
    I like how in The Netherlands coffee shops you can actually smoke weed. Is that available in US? The shops I’ve visited in US were very high end, you get carded, etc. While in The Netherlands patrons seem to be pretty low class, occasionally borderline mental.

dylan604 1y ago

Texas will be the last state in the union to legalize. Last election, Dallas voters decided to decriminalize, and the governor sued to prevent that from happening. There's a chasm between legalize and banning. Banning would prevent the compassionate use that has already been allowed. This banning is a knee-jerk reaction to those that have found the loop hole carved out in the compassionate use limits still allow for enough THC that recreational use can still be achieved. Rather than restricting the loop hole to still require prescription, they instead want to ban out right

abirch 1y ago
I would be betting on Utah to be the last state to legalize (it was the first to ban).
- dylan604 1y ago
  I don't have much familiarity with local Utah politics, so you could be right. However, I am familiar with the Texas local politics in how they are king of the gerrymander and plenty of other games where people like Karl Rove led the way.