3 ms·

"Do please cite evidence for this claim about the Affordable Care Act. I've been a long-time advocate for MMJ and have lobbied for it in front of county lawmake

"Do please cite evidence for this claim about the Affordable Care Act. I've been a long-time advocate for MMJ and have lobbied for it in front of county lawmakers, and I don't find this very credible" Is the combination of the administration's dealings with the pharmaceutical industry's lobbying group, PhRMA, and the fact that during the same period of time that those deals were being made the administration became more aggressive on marijuana raids, count? https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/09/us/politics/e-mails-reveal-extent-of-obamas-deal-with-industry-on-health-care.html?pagewanted=all https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/09/us/politics/e-mails-revea... http://reason.com/archives/2011/09/12/bummer/singlepage http://reason.com/archives/2011/09/12/bummer/singlepage Unfortunately, the extent of the administration's deal-making with the pharmaceutical lobby remains undisclosed. Why the public has not been given access to their emails is anyone's guess (I suspect most people would guess the same thing). Maybe in a few decades, when the full details of this administration's activities become public knowledge (assuming such things even happen), we can figure out if the simplest answer -- that the administration attacked marijuana in a quid-pro-quo with PhRMA -- is indeed the correct answer. "Also, your claim implicitly assumes that the number of dispensaries was static, when it was anything but." Are you actually claiming that nearly overnight, the number of medical marijuana dispensaries increased by more than a factor of four? That somehow, the number of suppliers in California simple increased by pure coincidence in 2009? This administration has been one of the most aggressively anti-drug-law-reform administrations in the history of the war on drugs. The President has publicly (and falsely) stated that it is up to Congress to legalize marijuana. He falsely claimed that he would suspend raids once he ejected Bush administration holdovers from top DEA positions, only to appoint Bush administration holdovers to those positions and increase the number of raids.

anigbrowl 14y ago
No. That's a post hoc fallacy, or as it is commonly referred to around here: 'correlation does not prove causation.' And yes, the number of dispensaries did shoot up in a relatively short period. Los Angeles in particular turned into a free-for-all, with estimates of up to 1000 operating in LA county at one point, much to the chagrin of the NorCal MMJ community that has been pushing for legalization. Indeed, all the legal and industry advisers at Oakland's Oaksterdam University (of which I am a graduate) predicted in advance that the LA dispensary gold rush was on a collision course with the LA county authorities, which is exactly what happened. And while the feds conducted investigations up here in Norther California, it's worth bearing in mind that they didn't actually shut anything down - Oaksterdam university is still taking students, major dispensaries like Harborside remain open and so on. If you look at the record of small dispensaries shut down in Northern California (where I live and pay more attention) you'll see that in almost every case it involved weapons charges or non-payment of taxes. This administration has been one of the most aggressively anti-drug-law-reform administrations in the history of the war on drugs. Yeah, just look at the abolition of the crack sentencing disparity. The President has publicly (and falsely) stated that it is up to Congress to legalize marijuana. This is correct. The President can direct the surgeon general to reconsider a drug's scheduling, but a great many substances (including marijuana) are explicitly proscribed in federal legislation. Clearly you have an axe to grind, but I suggest you grind it a little more carefully.

anigbrowl 14y ago

No. That's a post hoc fallacy, or as it is commonly referred to around here: 'correlation does not prove causation.' And yes, the number of dispensaries did shoot up in a relatively short period. Los Angeles in particular turned into a free-for-all, with estimates of up to 1000 operating in LA county at one point, much to the chagrin of the NorCal MMJ community that has been pushing for legalization. Indeed, all the legal and industry advisers at Oakland's Oaksterdam University (of which I am a graduate) predicted in advance that the LA dispensary gold rush was on a collision course with the LA county authorities, which is exactly what happened. And while the feds conducted investigations up here in Norther California, it's worth bearing in mind that they didn't actually shut anything down - Oaksterdam university is still taking students, major dispensaries like Harborside remain open and so on. If you look at the record of small dispensaries shut down in Northern California (where I live and pay more attention) you'll see that in almost every case it involved weapons charges or non-payment of taxes. This administration has been one of the most aggressively anti-drug-law-reform administrations in the history of the war on drugs. Yeah, just look at the abolition of the crack sentencing disparity. The President has publicly (and falsely) stated that it is up to Congress to legalize marijuana. This is correct. The President can direct the surgeon general to reconsider a drug's scheduling, but a great many substances (including marijuana) are explicitly proscribed in federal legislation. Clearly you have an axe to grind, but I suggest you grind it a little more carefully.