General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsObama Announces He WON'T Prosecute POT SMOKERS in Washington and Colorado
Season's Greetings!!
In an interview with ABC News, President Obama stated that his administration wont prosecute marijuana users in Washington, Colorado, or other states where recreational use is legal. The president told Barbara Walters, Weve got bigger fish to fry. It would not make sense for us to see a top priority as going after recreational users in states that have determined that its legal. Obama said that he does not support legalization, at this point, but he noted that public opinion is shifting on the issue.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/president-obama-marijuana-users-high-priority-drug-war/story?id=17946783#.UMs926VPqkT
President Obama said, This is a tough problem, because Congress has not yet changed the law. I head up the executive branch; were supposed to be carrying out laws. And so what were going to need to have is a conversation about, How do you reconcile a federal law that still says marijuana is a federal offense and state laws that say that its legal?
Obamas answer to his own question appears to be something that Republicans preach, but rarely practice. It is a concept that is foreign to current the Republican Party. He is respecting the will of the voters. Barack Obama is demonstrating a greater advocacy for states rights than the Republicans who supposedly champion them.
In the same way that Republicans are ignoring the will of a majority of voters on raising taxes on the wealthy and tackling the deficit with a balanced approach, they are also many of the same people who are wringing their hands and dying to prosecute legal marijuana users. The country is seeing the same kind of public opinion shift on marijuana legalization that is also occurring on same sex marriage.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/obama-announces-prosecute-pot-smokers-washington-colorado.html
RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)Right answer.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Response to RomneyLies (Reply #1)
Post removed
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)I trust this president, and despite the frenzy and fearmongering permeating the MJ using American public around here, terrified that the president was "reviewing legal recourse" regarding Washington and Colorado, I knew he was merely double-checking what he could circumvent, just like he did with refusing to go after the children of undocumented immigrants.
I've even predicted as much, despite a lot of criticism here, that this would be his course of action.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)frazzled
(18,402 posts)Seriously, you've got to have a case of the paranoids to think the Feds are going to bust into your basement rec room to confiscate your bag of weed and put you in federal prison. This was always about executing federal law to go after big time dealers and growers, especially when either money laundering or guns are involved.
Segami
(14,923 posts)that the Feds won't move to bust users.
If anything, just like Don't Ask, Don't Tell,....this could be a WH trial balloon testing the national tolerance.
The cracks are showing and time and effort will also bring this wall down.
RKP5637
(67,108 posts)also bring this wall down."
frylock
(34,825 posts)yeh, see HSBC for example.
Shampoobra
(423 posts)Washington state has until December 2013 to have the whole growing and distribution network in place.
Once the stores are open for business, all the Feds would have to do is arrest one buyer as he or she leaves the store, and when the defendant argues the legality of the product in court, the Feds could try to have the whole state initiative struck down as a violation of Federal law.
It would have been the simplest and cheapest way for the Feds to kill Initiative 502, and Obama's statement indicates they won't be taking that option.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)RZM
(8,556 posts)That being said . . .
This is a positive step for sure. It's not a huge step, but it's definitely in the right direction. And that's something to be commended.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)....to do something they can use to impeach him don't you? He has to be very careful in terms of what he says publicly on any legal issue, especially if he says anything contrary to current Federal law.
We can push politicians on this or any other issue, but we have to understand that the President has limits to what he can say or do publicly.
frylock
(34,825 posts)stop being afraid of what they're going to do ffs.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)at great peril. Politics is still politics.
No need to GIVE the gop a stick to hit himself with ... especially, with the fickle state of the public.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)...but the President has to operate within certain parameters, whether you like it or not.
As far as the "Republican congress hovering above a single-digit approval rating", so what? That hasn't had any impact on how they've conducted themselves so far, has it? Do you really think that would stop them from attempting to impeach the President if they had a chance to do so?
Ffs, indeed.
frylock
(34,825 posts)it didn't. let them hold impeachment hearings because Obama rescheduled MJ, and just sit back and watch the demise of the republican party.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)That's why they keep pushing these wingnut policies despite what the public wants. As long as they are in safe districts, they are free to push their 'bagger agenda.
marsis
(301 posts)BS on your post. That's one of the problems with this guy, he's so afraid of the right. It's long passed time for this President to "man-up and do something right in the "War on America".
If he only had the fortitude of GWB.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)They are in a corner at this point. They can't go against states rights so they have to leave the Marijuana issue behind. Obama has taken a baby step. Once we start bringing in revenue in Co and Wa the feds will have to seriously reconsider their position if they want to continue to be serious about "fixing the debt".
marsis
(301 posts)He's ended or ending two other wars. He's been far worse than "W" in this arena. If Americans want to use it what's the frigging problem besides BIG money? Oh wait.......................
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)on point
(2,506 posts)And BTW, much better to just go full bore legalize, save the billions in the stupid drug war and release all those people from long prison sentences and save some more billions on the prison system.
Only then should people relent on the president for this issue.
And why doesn't he lead and instead always needs to be dragged to the correct decision??
Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #4)
Post removed
shanti
(21,675 posts)when he quits attacking california's medical marijuana programs!
jwirr
(39,215 posts)have Holder change the status of marijuana from schedule 1 to 2 to show that he understands reality.
Kber
(5,043 posts)Asking out of genuine ignornance on my part. I thought the schedules were set by congress, but admit I'm no expert on the subject.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)as it was Nixon who assigned the Schedule I in the first place (after talking Congress into passing a law allowing the president to assign scheduling). What the president can assign, another president COULD unassiagn -- if he really wanted to. I wouldn't hold my breath.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)for several hours now in LBN:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014335989
Some REALLY good responses and, to the poster above, yes, the President IS criticized (clutch the pearls!)
LTH
P.S. Not a slam to the OP but the one in LBN has sort of a kick-start in the responses category.
datasuspect
(26,591 posts)toke it up!
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)because Holder has been tough on medical dispensaries even though medical marijuana is legal in several states. Just because Obama says he doesn't want to go after anybody doesn't mean the DOJ won't go after them.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)When was the last bust of a legitimate MM Dispensary?
I don't believe there is one coming in the near future either.
green for victory
(591 posts)but it might be the biggest
"Oakland's latest round in its campaign to save the nation's largest medical marijuana dispensary includes a statement this week from Mayor Jean Quan saying federal prosecutors should back off, and the federal government's own patent application lauding the therapeutic qualities of cannabis.
...U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag filed suit in July seeking the closure of Harborside and the forfeiture of its offices at 1840 Embarcadero. She said the dispensary, which supplies marijuana to 108,000 patients, is violating federal drug laws.
On Dec. 20, U.S. Magistrate Maria Elena James is scheduled to consider a request by the building's owner, Ana Chretien, to shut down the dispensary and Oakland's request to put Chretien's motion on hold until James rules on the city's challenge to the government's suit. Oakland claims the federal statute of limitations required the government to seek forfeiture no later than 2011, five years after Harborside opened.
http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Oakland-cites-surprise-medical-pot-backer-4113767.php
Over the past year, Haag and California's three other federal prosecutors have brought similar actions against landlords throughout the state that lease space to dispensaries, most of which have been evicted or closed on their own.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/11/harborside-health-center-lawsuit_n_1956670.html
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)if the litigation was abandoned.
Or alternatively (and with a better strategic result), have the case continue which, with President Obama's statement, would allow Harborside a 14th Amendment argument.
This approach would be far more certain, and far less politically risky, than the DoJ changing the Schedule or waiting on Congress to act.
green for victory
(591 posts)with all due respect, perhaps you haven't been paying attention
But hopefully I'm wrong and you are right, and in the next few days the Feds will drop the case. Dec. 20 is close!
On Dec. 20, U.S. Magistrate Maria Elena James is scheduled to consider a request by the building's owner, Ana Chretien, to shut down the dispensary and Oakland's request to put Chretien's motion on hold until James rules on the city's challenge to the government's suit.
If I had an extra dollar to my name, I'd offer to bet. But I don't.
Good luck!
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)dropped the day of the Hearing.
But that said, did you pay attention to the second part of my post? I've been party to that too ... where we proceeded with the litigation knowing we would lose; and thereby, cementing the policy change, that was politically risky.
slampoet
(5,032 posts)They've increased K9 patrols of random pedestrians and are stalling this in the courts.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)to take your weed, and use it themselves!
tavalon
(27,985 posts)Seems they have been pretty feisty in the recent past about medical marijuana so I would think recreational would be just one more jab at the puritan ethic at the DOJ's office.
Dustlawyer
(10,495 posts)to go into business, and just before harvest, Obama went back on his word. They could not find a dispensary for their crop. It was timed to screw the industry the most, even though Obama had said he would not enforce the Fed laws. What was up with that?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)to take specific actions to not prosecute smokers, growers and sellers, esp medical marijuana dispensaries.
Specific actions would likely include moving or transferring personnel that now have the job to bust and prosecute growers and sellers.
If the President doesnt follow thru, tell him Barbara Walters will be real mad.
frylock
(34,825 posts)so good luck finding any.
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)under MMJ.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)And while they're at it, they vote Dem!
We can sweep in 2014 if we push progressive policies.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)"At their state convention the Democratic Party of Colorado included marijuana legalization as part of their new party platform. The platform supports Amendment 64, an initiative already on the ballot that would legalize, tax and regulate marijuana for the use by adults over the age of 21. The support of one of the states two major political parties should be an important boost to the campaign as it works to build support among voters before November.
The Colorado Democratic Partys platforms includes: 17. Regulate and tax marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol, limiting its use to those 21 and older. We support Amendment 64, the Initiative to regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol.
While the party at its state convention approved a new platform that supports Amendment 64, the party spokesman wants to point out that it has not formally endorsed the amendment. Technically, only the partys central committee can offer formal endorsements of amendments or candidates on behalf of the state party.
The Democratic Party of Colorado is simply reflecting the views and wishes of its base with this move. A PPP poll from December found that 64% of Democrats in Colorado think the use of marijuana should be legal, while only 26% of Democrats think it should be illegal. Nationally, a Gallup poll from last year found that 57% of Democrats nationwide believe the use of marijuana should be legal.
Having the support of a major party for an active campaign to legalize marijuana is more proof that the issue has gone mainstream. As more politicians and local political parties come out in support of the idea, it becomes easier and easier for other elected officials and groups to follow suit."
http://justsaynow.firedoglake.com/2012/04/16/colorado-democratic-party-supports-marijuana-legalization-initiative/
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)which is a fairly progressive state. I'm sure that there will be some push here.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)The feds don't have the resources to arrest pot smokers. State and local cops make 99% of all arrests.
He begs the question of whether his administration will allow Colorado and Washington to implement schemes to tax and regulate marijuana commerce, as per the will of the voters in those states.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)see. You haven't even given the guy a chance.
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)glowing
(12,233 posts)at those providing marijuana. A person growing marijuana will have more than 2 oz around... So, it will be a distribution issue.
When congress figures out how to write the rules so that Big Tobacco becomes the "new distributors" and figures out a way to make big pharma/ bio tech figures out how to make marijuana addictive, then it will be all set to legalize.
After all, money walks; and there are some who want in on all the profits.
green for victory
(591 posts)Try to open a bank account anywhere in the US after declaring you are a medical cannabis dispensary
And Washington State thinks the Feds are going to allow state run stores to put their money into an FDIC insured institution.
We shall see...
Oh, they've got the BigPharma thing already covered
glowing
(12,233 posts)green for victory
(591 posts)wouldn't like that
". Biden has sponsored more damaging drug war legislation than any Democrat in Congress. Hate the way federal prosecutors use RICO laws to take aim at drug offenders? Thank Biden. How about the abomination that is federal asset forfeiture laws? Thank Biden. Think federal prosecutors have too much power in drug cases? Thank Biden.
Think the title of a Drug Czar is sanctimonious and silly? Thank Biden, who helped create the position (and still considers it an accomplishment worth boasting about). Tired of the ridiculous steroids hearings in Congress? thank Biden, who led the effort to make steroids a Schedule 3 drug, and has been among the blowhardiest of the blowhards when it comes to sports and performance enhancing drugs. Biden voted in favor of using international development aid for drug control (think plan Columbia, plan Afghanistan, and other meddling anti-drug efforts that have only fostered loathing of America, backlash, and unintended consequences). Oh, and he was also the chief sponsor of 2004s horrendous RAVE Act.
http://stopthedrugwar.org/speakeasy/2008/aug/24/joe_bidens_awful_record_drug_pol
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)That's the real issue. Of course he isn't going to go after pot smokers! The feds don't have the resources.
But will the administration allow Colorado and Washington to implement regulated marijuana commerce, as per the will of the voters?
mike_c
(36,281 posts)...in California!
aquart
(69,014 posts)Canuckistanian
(42,290 posts)Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)We need to put legalization on more ballots in 2014. It's too bad we couldn't make it like a profit sharing thing for the country like oil is to Alaska. Have Cannabis Cup competitions in every state, and get imported weed too.
Democracyinkind
(4,015 posts)Lol. The naivite of some - as if consumers were ever seriously targeted by the Feds...
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)He does something right, the Blame Obama First crowd will just pocket this, NOT say thank you and bitch about the next rumor flying around.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)maveric56
(137 posts)Holders "jack-booted thugs" raided almost ALL the med-mar stores and jailed many of the operators here in CA. One guy, that I know is still behind bars!
klyon
(1,697 posts)but he could end the war tomorrow by removing pot from the schedule and telling justice to drop all cases then release all political prisoners convicted of these bogus laws
this has gone on long enough
people in other states deserve the same treatment
equal rights for all
Floyd_Gondolli
(1,277 posts)Most who have followed this issue knew that it would be physically impossible to prosecute users, but businesses are another matter. Soon there will be stores in these states tht sell marijuana to those who are old enough to buy it. What the federal government does then, if anything, seems key here.
I'm beginning to believe it may be a look the other way approach for a year or two to see how it works with a possible crackdown on growers and sellers if it's a disaster. But I expect it to be fairly successful. The Colorado law is a model for future states IMO.
nolabear
(41,960 posts)I've lived all my life with that thing hanging over my head, the little bit of pot I like like the occasional cocktail. I can walk down the street now? I can smoke at the festivals and outdoor concerts? I don't have to have that guilty feeling that my overbearing superego imposes even though I totally believe in legalizing?
It's going to be interesting getting used to this.
green for victory
(591 posts)you might find the text of the initiative interesting
http://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/i502.pdf
and try this: Ask the yes voters you run across if they've read it