Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, June 21, 2011
Politics / Drugs Here We Go, Washington
Posted by Dominic Holden on Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 4:40 PM
By the look of things, we're about to become ground zero in the national battle to legalize marijuana. Tomorrow morning at 11:00 a.m. in the Downtown Seattle Library, a well-organized new campaign called New Approach Washington will roll out the details of a still-partly-mysterious marijuana legalization initiative. So far they're only saying it would "authorize the Liquor Control Board to regulate the production and distribution of marijuana for sale to adults 21 and over in state-licensed stores."
It appears to be an unprecedented attempt to replace marijuana prohibition with a fully regulated marijuana industry.
Past measures that failed have been, in general, decriminalization proposals that left many questions unanswered. For instance, Sensible Washington has run a petition drive two years in a row for a measure that simply removes criminal penalties but makes law enforcement and other critics wonder what happens to a loose-cannon, unregulated supply chain. I asked the leaders of Sensible Washington yesterday if their petition, which is due in early July, had a chance of making the ballot. They never replied, but their website says they've collected only 56,000 signatures (less than a quarter of the number they'll need).
This new initiative is cut from a different cloth. The backers look powerful. And given that it will be filed in mid-summer, this would be an initiative to the legislature (which goes to lawmakers in Olympia early next year and to the ballot in 2012). That will allow New Approach Washington to petition all summer and fall, gather funding for over a year before reaching the November 2012 ballot, enjoy the progressive electorate of a presidential year, be an asset to Democrats and unions that want to draw young pro-pot voters to the polls, and win next year.
Polling shows most Washington voters support marijuana legalization.
Let me say it again: This could win. This could be the big fight with the federal government. It will certainly stir the debate. It may go to the Supreme Court in a challenge of federal preemption. And these guys are serious.
Look at the lineup of the initiative's sponsors:
Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes
· John McKay, former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Washington (2001-2007)
· Travel writer Rick Steves
· Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson, Washington state legislator, 36th District, prime sponsor of HB 2401 (2010) and HB 1550 (2011)
· Kim Marie Thorburn, MD, MPH, former director of the Spokane Regional Health District (1997-2006)
· Salvador A. Mungia, immediate past president of the Washington State Bar Association
· Mark Johnson, past president of the Washington State Bar Association (2008-2009)
· Robert W. Wood, MD, former director of the HIV/AIDS Program of Public Health — Seattle & King County (1986-2010)
· Roger Roffman, DSW, professor emeritus, University of Washington School of Social Work
· Alison Holcomb, New Approach Washington campaign director
That's right: A former US Attorney is a co-sponsor of a campaign to legalize, regulate, and tax marijuana. Here we go.
4
Utterly delightful news. You were right to highlight McKay - no matter who else is a sponsor, his is the name that will draw the respectful attention of the decision makers outside our little pond here. He has a huge amount of goodwill at today's DOJ and among current and former USAs for his fantastic handling of having been part of Bush kicking all those USAs to the curb during the 2006 purges. (Remember, among other things it was suspected he got axed for refusing to enact the GOP's witchhunt against Gregoire after her narrow Rossi defeat.)
Good for you, John - make the old neighborhood proud, kiddo.
Good for you, John - make the old neighborhood proud, kiddo.
6
This is pretty astoundingly respectable. This... even if this doesn't pass this still seems like a pretty huge deal because the people advocating it are a whole different breed than the hippies and libertarians it's been forever. Are we seriously going to see an end of the drug war in the next ten years? I can't even imagine what that would be like. Would everyone in jail on a marijuana possession charge be released?
7
@6, I think the difference here isn't just that these people are interested in identifying, rather than minimizing or denying, the challenges legalization will inevitably bring.
It's that this gang has a plausible shot at SOLVING THEM.
It's that this gang has a plausible shot at SOLVING THEM.
9
Problem is that this would without a doubt subject state workers to federal charges. The idea that giving a license to a co-op would may have been stretching things, but if you have a state worker actively selling that is clearly against federal law.
Maybe a couple high profile prosecutions of poor state workers would be a rallying cry, but I don't see it getting anywhere close to that. Even if it passes no way you get the union to go along without massive lawsuits and I know I sure as hell would not work in a state store.
Maybe a couple high profile prosecutions of poor state workers would be a rallying cry, but I don't see it getting anywhere close to that. Even if it passes no way you get the union to go along without massive lawsuits and I know I sure as hell would not work in a state store.
10
Also, I think this means we're voting for president, governor, a senator, marijuana legalization and marriage equality next year.
Sounds good to me.
Sounds good to me.
11
@9) Cigarettes, beer, and wine are taxed and regulated, but they're not sold by state workers. I feel pretty confident that this gang--given their legal background--took note of the Gregoire/state worker debacle on medical marijuana this year and wrote an initiative that didn't stray into that quicksand.
12
@11 Your own bolded text says otherwise:
""authorize the Liquor Control Board to regulate the production and distribution of marijuana for sale to adults 21 and over in state-licensed stores.""
I hope you're right, but I think that fear alone will be enough to doom this.
""authorize the Liquor Control Board to regulate the production and distribution of marijuana for sale to adults 21 and over in state-licensed stores.""
I hope you're right, but I think that fear alone will be enough to doom this.
14
@12) The liquor board regulates beer sales--and beer sellers--without state workers actually selling it. You may be right that this will be one of many political, legal, and logistical complications for the initiative. But I'm guessing that the text has addressed that as much as it reasonably can.
15
@13) Yeah, I hear you. And my crystal ball done cracked, so who knows what will happen. But I think the larger ambition here is to have the fight on a national stage, pass what can pass in Washington, and defend whatever becomes law as far as possible up the chain of federal courts.
17
Is this the same Mckay that caged marc emery in federal prison for paying tax on the pot seeds he sold? and roffman? omg, he's laughed at you you for years as a government shill 'proving' marijuanas hazards FOR PROFIT with his smoke pot get paid 'research'! Assuming you folks aren't crazy, are you just terribly misinformed?
18
I understood "state-licensed" to be just that, and not alluding to "state run", and that the issue stems from the legality of a state employee issuing said license.
19
yes, if this passes, it will go to the courts. that is exactly the point. force the issue into the courts. and more importantly, force the issue into the public eye. if passed, will this law get struck down? sure, there's a great possibility that will happen. and so what? it will still be a massive push in the right direction on this issue. also, it may force the legislature to get off their asses & pass decrim. it would be worth it for that alone.
20
wow, look at the breakdown by age in the polling data provided in the post. high 50s to low 60s in favor of legalization for people under 65. people 65+... 32%. time is on our side. this is just about the old generation dying & the younger generations voting.
21
welp, I'm not doing anything particular tomorrow morn. Maybe I'll head down there. Kind of interested to get a petition to have my housemates sign and turn it in. We kind of usually ignore signature gathers.
22
Decrim relies on my admitting that i've done something bad P.S.D.. It takes away my right to a trial or a jury, just forcing me to PAY A FINE and admit that i've done something bad. I've not done anything bad, i've harmed no one, no one has taken a loss by my smoking pot and i'm not going to lie and say that it did just to appease someone i've never met. Decrim is a nice word because no one really understands it's details, but trust me - decrim is no win, not even a much ballyhooed 'baby step'.
23
@22
disagree. decrim is a step in the right direction. it means you don't have a misdemeanor on your record. it means you don't go to jail. if i get busted under decrim & i get busted under not decrim, i know which one will feel like progress & which one won't.
disagree. decrim is a step in the right direction. it means you don't have a misdemeanor on your record. it means you don't go to jail. if i get busted under decrim & i get busted under not decrim, i know which one will feel like progress & which one won't.
24
talk is cheap
are the same morons who shit the bed with 1068 involved in this?
let's see if the potheads can actually put something respectable together.
are the same morons who shit the bed with 1068 involved in this?
let's see if the potheads can actually put something respectable together.
25
If it doesn't deal with wealth transfer fairly and protect production absolutely, it is bad law and should not be implemented.
26
@23 The biggest problem I see with decrim is that it doesn't solve any of the budget and jobs related issues around marijuana. It removes the jobs around arresting, prosecuting, and incarcerating marijuana users but it does not create any legal market jobs for legit sales of marijuana.
The solution in my mind is to go straight for full legalization. I feel that the reasons I outlined above make it actually easier to pass a legalization than a decriminalization.
The solution in my mind is to go straight for full legalization. I feel that the reasons I outlined above make it actually easier to pass a legalization than a decriminalization.
27
I just want this to pass so that potsmokers no longer get to act like outlaws. SO annoying when my grandpa sticks it to 'the man' when he lights his bong with his social security check.
28
Such great news! I remember smoking reefer with my ex-partner lawyer and John McKay at ABA conventions and at our home in Ballard some 10+ years ago. He's a good guy and I'm glad he supports this initiative.
30
Even if I won't be able to be part of the first gigantic mob of people going to the Liquor store to buy pot, I'm still excited.
32
I guess I'll be on the wrong side of history and oppose this...too many unanswered questions...why the rush...and I still don't understand who is backing the tunnel so strongly.
33
This outta be interesting. I am sure it will pass eventually I just don't see it passing for awile yet theres still too much buracratic bull. But I will keep my fingers crossed and eyes open
34
Not to be a killjoy, but when the Justice Department threatens to prosecute the Liquor Control Board members for conspiring to sell marijuana, how many board members do you think are going to decide that the 'no sales' is the proper amount of regulation? Or, maybe worse, if they are also in charge of distributing medicinal marijuana, they'll actually kill off the independent clinics too.
I'd rather have a bill that just decriminalized possession, and allows private adults to grow their own.
I'd rather have a bill that just decriminalized possession, and allows private adults to grow their own.
35
If they propose to put cannabis in liquor stores, wont this law end up with a similar non-functioning fate as SB-5073?
I-1149 is a much better solution as federal preemption cant be imposed on I-1149.
This is what I wrote about this new proposal.
http://slu2.com/85U
I-1149 is a much better solution as federal preemption cant be imposed on I-1149.
This is what I wrote about this new proposal.
http://slu2.com/85U
36
This can happen in 2011 - no need to wait until 2012. Go to < https://sensiblewashington.org/blog/wp-c… >, download the petition, have it printed 11x17 (front and back), fill it out with friends and family, then mail it to: Sensible Washington, P.O. Box 1184, Seattle, WA 98111-1184.
I-1149 removes civil and criminal penalties for adult use, possession and cultivation of all cannabis (marijuana and industrial hemp). Nothing in our bill warrants federal preemption.
Our count has not been updated simply because there are too many petitions in the field, waiting to be turned in. We cannot give an accurate number at this time because of this unknown variable. Last week we were focused on fund raising, now our attention is focused on signatures and petition turn-in. We will be updating our count in the near future, as more filled petitions are mailed to the campaign.
Supporting I-1149 now, will push the legalization agenda in the public sphere. It will empower similar movements in Oregon, California, and Colorado for 2012. If I-1149 gets on the ballot, but is failed by the voters in 2011, it will still have succeeded in making legalization a mainstream issue in Washington State, then give New Approach Washington momentum for their campaign in 2012.
We need more boots on the ground to get this done - but, it can be done. Every like-minded individual needs to step up to the plate to help. Go to < www.sensiblewashinton.org > to volunteer and contact a coordinator in your area.
We have two weekends remaining; including the 4th of July holiday. There will be community events and celebrations all over the state - a prime opportunity to gather signatures.
No one can do everything, but everyone can do something. This is change we can believe in, but we need everyone to impact change by collecting signatures for I-1149.
More...
I-1149 removes civil and criminal penalties for adult use, possession and cultivation of all cannabis (marijuana and industrial hemp). Nothing in our bill warrants federal preemption.
Our count has not been updated simply because there are too many petitions in the field, waiting to be turned in. We cannot give an accurate number at this time because of this unknown variable. Last week we were focused on fund raising, now our attention is focused on signatures and petition turn-in. We will be updating our count in the near future, as more filled petitions are mailed to the campaign.
Supporting I-1149 now, will push the legalization agenda in the public sphere. It will empower similar movements in Oregon, California, and Colorado for 2012. If I-1149 gets on the ballot, but is failed by the voters in 2011, it will still have succeeded in making legalization a mainstream issue in Washington State, then give New Approach Washington momentum for their campaign in 2012.
We need more boots on the ground to get this done - but, it can be done. Every like-minded individual needs to step up to the plate to help. Go to < www.sensiblewashinton.org > to volunteer and contact a coordinator in your area.
We have two weekends remaining; including the 4th of July holiday. There will be community events and celebrations all over the state - a prime opportunity to gather signatures.
No one can do everything, but everyone can do something. This is change we can believe in, but we need everyone to impact change by collecting signatures for I-1149.
37
Sorry - the link in my previous comment concatenated. Go to < https://sensiblewashington.org/blog/wp-c… > to download I-1149.
38
Dumb pot heads. Cigarette/tobacco companies are hated by the left but pot is OK to smoke. They both cause cancer and it is annoying to be around users of either substance.
39
@38 Do you support criminalizing tobacco? As in, get caught with the stuff and spend time in jail? If not, why the double standard?
If we have a chance at full legalization, forget decriminalization. The way to make this work and be well supported is to heavily tax the stuff and keep it out of the hands of kids - something only possible with full legalization.
If we have a chance at full legalization, forget decriminalization. The way to make this work and be well supported is to heavily tax the stuff and keep it out of the hands of kids - something only possible with full legalization.
43
And I am guessing this is the link you are spouting:
http://lungcancer.about.com/od/causesofl…
Hardly proof. But guess what....there are plenty of other ways to utilize the wonderful properties of cannabis without smoking it at all. So nice try but you fail.
http://lungcancer.about.com/od/causesofl…
Hardly proof. But guess what....there are plenty of other ways to utilize the wonderful properties of cannabis without smoking it at all. So nice try but you fail.
46
I still prefer hard cider.
But am glad our national farce of the Drug War on MJ will end, at least in our state.
This will push the cost and turf wars over to Idaho and Utah - and that's a good thing.
But am glad our national farce of the Drug War on MJ will end, at least in our state.
This will push the cost and turf wars over to Idaho and Utah - and that's a good thing.
48
@47: A typical Republican creationist who doesn't understand how evolution and natural selection work. So sad that so many people who "do drugs" are so much more capable and successful than yourself.
49
@48 Next time you fly a commercial airliner, or go into surgery, be glad that most successful , capable people are not drug users. As for you, please go upstairs from your basement and tell your mommy that you are a drug addict.
50
@49:
My doctor is a stoner, and I don't know about you, but all the degrees and certificates on his wall would lead me to presume that he is rather successful.
My doctor is a stoner, and I don't know about you, but all the degrees and certificates on his wall would lead me to presume that he is rather successful.
51
@50 That's a serious issue. Give me your doctor's name i'll report him/her to the medical board. As for your well being i'd advise you to get second opinion on anything serious.
52
@49: I talked with my Glenn Beck-head mother last night about pot initiatives, and even SHE isn't against legalization/taxation.
I doubt you eschew "drugs", but even if you avoided all psychoactive chemicals, it still wouldn't make you any smarter, more capable, successful, or moral. You'd be the same boring loser you've been for all your life.
I doubt you eschew "drugs", but even if you avoided all psychoactive chemicals, it still wouldn't make you any smarter, more capable, successful, or moral. You'd be the same boring loser you've been for all your life.
53
@52 From your comments, it sounds like you believe that drug usage makes one less intelligent. Thank you, maybe if the other pot heads read that they will be inspired to make something of themselves.
54
@53: I know just as many functional pot-users as drinkers, I believe being joe101 makes one less intelligent.
55
while I am not an opponent of this bill or other MJ legislation, there is a real danger. I have been engaged in a youth storytelling project, and one of the stories we got last week really drove home a point-
A yong man said "pot should be legal because drinking makes you stupid but pot doesn't even impair you...No one has ever proven that pot makes you a bad driver."
This whirlwind of pro-legalization rhetoric has left young folks with no idea what information to trust, and a surplus of really bad info. The adults in this equation need to step up and be adults, cause all your "it's from nature, doesn't even cause cancer" bullshit is not the sort of line grown-ups who want to promote sensible, responsible use should be bringing to the table.
A yong man said "pot should be legal because drinking makes you stupid but pot doesn't even impair you...No one has ever proven that pot makes you a bad driver."
This whirlwind of pro-legalization rhetoric has left young folks with no idea what information to trust, and a surplus of really bad info. The adults in this equation need to step up and be adults, cause all your "it's from nature, doesn't even cause cancer" bullshit is not the sort of line grown-ups who want to promote sensible, responsible use should be bringing to the table.
56
@55: Lord knows better education and throwing DARE in the dumpster is impossible.
Man, people look up the STUPIDEST most selfish reasons to keep prohibition alive.
Man, people look up the STUPIDEST most selfish reasons to keep prohibition alive.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-WY) Says Members of His Party Have Rocks for Brains by Charles Mudede
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (56) RSS