Thread: MARIJUANA POLITICS September 1, 2015

Marijuana Poll: What it Means for Sanders, Clinton, Trump, Bush and the Rest of the 2016 Field

Anthony Johnson | August 31, 2015 8:40 am | 0 comments

Marijuana Majority recently released the group’s first poll, conducted by Public Policy Polling, to question registered voters in Iowa and New Hampshire on whether the federal government should respect state marijuana laws. The poll found that strong majorities of Democrats, Republican and independents want Uncle Sam to stay out of states’ cannabis policies. While it might surprise some to find that a strong majority of Republican voters in the Hawkeye and Granite States want the federal government to respect the will of the voters who have passed medical and recreational marijuana laws, it really shouldn’t. States’ rights has long been a foundation of conservative and libertarian-minded GOP voters.

Earlier polls have had similar findings. A Pew Research Center survey in April 2013 found that 57% of Republicans nationwide wanted the feds to leave state marijuana laws alone. The Marijuana Majority commissioned poll likely signifies both that Iowa and New Hampshire voters are more independent-minded than many other states and that this is a continuing trend among all voters across all demographics. It makes sense that voters, regardless of affiliation, want the federal government to better prioritize resources when there are so many more important law enforcement and public safety issues facing our country.

When Marijuana Majority asked, “Do Iowans want the next president to respect state marijuana laws?” 71% of Iowa voters overall stated “Yes” comprising of 80% of Democrats, 64% of Republicans, and 70% of independents. When Granite State voters were asked the same question, the numbers were very similar: 73% overall, 77% of Dems, 67% of the GOP, and 76% among independents.

Marijuana law reformers are going to press the Democratic and Republican candidates on their cannabis policies in these early states very often. Bernie Sanders is likely to get the edge on the Democratic side as he has had the more progressive and bold platform on marijuana and the greater Drug War thus far. Hillary Clinton, as usual, has been very risk-averse, adhering to an outdated conventional wisdom on the issue and many haven’t forgotten the fact that she opposed marijuana decriminalization in her failed 2008 presidential run. While Sanders calls for an end to private prisons, the prison-industrial complex remains major donors to the Clinton Machine. Joe Biden, if he decides to enter the race, has a long history of being on the wrong side of Drug War history.

On the Republican side, Donald Trump, Jeb Bush and Rand Paul will likely benefit from their marijuana policies. If I was advising Paul, I would encourage him to be true to his libertarian philosophy and come out strong in support of marijuana legalization; instead, he seems to be trying to portray himself as an establishment Republican, but that goes against his strengths, in my opinion and voters see through that. Chris Christie and Marco Rubio are hurt most by the states’ rights marijuana position of voters as each of them have pledged to waste federal resources by trampling the will of voters by using armed federal agents to raid, arrest, prosecute and imprison cannabis cultivators, providers and consumers.

Many people may shrug at these poll numbers and suggest that federal marijuana policy isn’t a big deal, but the candidates who don’t listen to voters will pay the political price. The proper utilization of federal resources is a huge deal to everyday American citizens, many of whom are living paycheck to paycheck. Hard-working Americans don’t want their tax dollars being wasted and enforcing federal marijuana law over the will of over half the country’s population is certainly a waste.

The cannabis lobby is growing more powerful by the day, with more and more dollars to donate. More importantly, the cannabis community is, contrary to stereotypes, very engaged in politics as our livelihood and freedom is literally on the line. Poll after poll and election and election make it very clear: the American people are tired of marijuana prohibition and that out-of-step politicians adhering to a Reefer Madness mentality, will pay a political price.

http://marijuanapolitics.com/marijua...tie-and-rubio/

So volumes of marijuana crosses state lines now, and Colorado's neighbors are suing that state for exacerbating their enforcement problems that it now should be regulated by the U.S. Commerce dep't. I truly believe that one state who wants to legalize a common street drug that other states do not recognize as legal has a moral obligation to patrol
their borders adequately to protect and respect the rights of their neighbor! After all, did not Colorado brag about making the removal of marijuana illegal out of Colorado, then brag about the money they were making? Let them spend some for border security rather than acting like Mexico that they cannot control their border.

Colorado passing laws it does not enforce is a carbon copy of feds not enforcing laws. How much of that are we standing for. Now we have states doing passing laws with not intention of enforcement and getting away with it. More hypocritic action by voters, while the voters blame politicians elected by who. the voters.


Is this another example of what Americans believe to be getting a positive return on all those college educations? They can believe, but if so, I know that they are wrong! You cannot make it right by voting for wrong, as we have done for three decades. An example of that would be 2014!

Originally Posted by kevinssdad

So volumes of marijuana crosses state lines now, and Colorado's neighbors are suing that state for exacerbating their enforcement problems that it now should be regulated by the U.S. Commerce dep't. I truly believe that one state who wants to legalize a common street drug that other states do not recognize as legal has a moral obligation to patrol
their borders adequately to protect and respect the rights of their neighbor! After all, did not Colorado brag about making the removal of marijuana illegal out of Colorado, then brag about the money they were making? Let them spend some for border security rather than acting like Mexico that they cannot control their border.

Colorado passing laws it does not enforce is a carbon copy of feds not enforcing laws. How much of that are we standing for. Now we have states doing passing laws with not intention of enforcement and getting away with it. More hypocritic action by voters, while the voters blame politicians elected by who. the voters.

Is this another example of what Americans believe to be getting a positive return on all those college educations? They can believe, but if so, I know that they are wrong! You cannot make it right by voting for wrong, as we have done for three decades. An example of that would be 2014!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-legalization/

Just ask yourselves:

How is buying legal marijuana in Colorado instead of illegal marijuana in Kansas and Nebraska increasing drug arrests in Kansas, Nebraska? The only thing that's increasing is the angst of the foreign drug cartels in Kansas and Nebraska because they're losing sales to legal vendors in Colorado.

Kansas and Nebraska prosecutors and law enforcement officials need to re-focus their time and resources to arresting all the illegal aliens working in the meat and chicken industry in their states.

Here's the reality. The states that sued Colorado were fled by prosecutors and local law enforcement. Who is on the take in the War on Drugs? Who is bribing our politicians and police departments to persist in this War on Drugs? The same foreign drug cartels behind illegal immigration.

Colorado gets sued by a third group over marijuana legalization
By Niraj Chokshi March 5 2015

A fully budded marijuana plant ready for trimming is seen at the Botanacare marijuana store ahead of their grand opening in Northglenn, Colo., on Dec. 31, 2013. (Reuters/Rick Wilking)

A third group is taking Colorado to court over its decision to legalize pot.

A group of sheriffs and prosecutors from Colorado, Nebraska and Kansas filed a lawsuit Thursday centered on twin claims. Those within the state say the law — passed by voters as a constitutional amendment in 2012 — forces them to choose between the state and federal constitutions. Those out-of-state law enforcers charge that the Colorado law is doing them undue harm.

“I, my deputies and all of law enforcement in Colorado that are subject to the oath both to the United States and to the state of Colorado are in an untenable position,” Chad Day, sheriff of Colorado’s Yuma County, said at a Thursday morning press conference.

Sheriff Mark Overman of Nebraska’s Scotts Bluff County said legalization has placed an “undue burden” on surrounding states, as jails and courts fill up and those states are forced to cover medical and legal costs of the incarcerated. “In many cases, we are forced away from some of what we normally do because we are having to deal with Colorado-sourced marijuana,” he said.

In late December, Oklahoma and Nebraska sued neighboring Colorado over legalization, suggesting that it violates the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, which deems that the federal constitution and federal law “take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions.” Last month, an anti-crime group filed a similar pair of suits. As with the prior challenges, the group of sheriffs and county attorneys charge that Colorado’s law violates federal law as well as U.S. commitments covered by international treaties.

“The lawyers I’ve talked to dont think that… there’s a high likelihood that those suits will prevail.” — Gov. Hickenlooper said, in reference to the two previous legal challenges

Deuel County Sheriff Adam Hayward shows off a container of confiscated marijuana in Chappell, Neb., last July. (Photo by Nikki Kahn/The Washington Post)

The lawsuit has one named defendant: Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D). After a second group announced a legal challenge to the law, Hickenlooper said his lawyers had advised him that the challenges represent little threat.

“We’re going to do everything we can to make sure there’s no black market,” he said in a late-February interview. “We clearly haven’t gotten there yet, but we are going to redouble our efforts for our own purposes and also for the purposes of the neighboring states.” His legal advisers, he added, don’t think “that there’s a high likelihood that those suits will prevail.”

In the announcement, multiple members of the assembled group noted regret over having to sue Hickenlooper, who has said he is opposed to the law but is bound to fulfill the wishes of voters.

Advocates, meanwhile, say such suits represent the final fledgling attempt to overturn the law by the losing side of a long battle.

“While a growing majority of Americans supports replacing failed prohibition policies with legalization, there will always be some people who desperately try to cling to what’s familiar,” Tom Angell, chairman of Marijuana Majority, which connects supporters of legalization to “celebrities, elected officials and opinion leaders,” said in a statement. “The people of Colorado and other states have spoken, and now these prohibitionists who lost at the ballot box on Election Day are trying to overturn the will of the voters by making a last-ditch attempt in the courts. They are wrong about marijuana policy and they are on the wrong side of history.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-legalization/

Kansas and Nebraska prosecutors and law enforcement officials need to re-focus their time and resources to arresting all the illegal aliens working in the meat, chicken, and agriculture industries in their states and enforce US Immigration, US Labor and US Civil Rights Laws in their states, instead of wasting their time and resources filling their jails with pot-smokers by enforcing federal anti-pot laws.