Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
700,000 Pot Legalization Signatures Filed in California
California appears headed for a rollicking November ballot fight over whether to legalize and tax marijuana cultivation and use for adults 21 years and older.
Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, talks to reporters about the future of his bill to legalize, tax, and regulate marijuana use in California after a hearing in front of the Assembly Public Safety Committee at the Capitol in Sacramento, Calif., Tuesday, Jan. 12, 2010.
(AP Photo/Steve Yeater) Proponents of the "Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010" said Thursday that they had submitted to the state nearly 700,000 petition signatures - more than enough, if valid, to qualify the measure for the November ballot.
Secretary of State Debra Bowen has until June 24 to certify the measure, which needs 433,000 valid voter signatures to qualify.
But already legalization proponents and opponents are gearing up for a fight. The election battle is expected to feature rival TV commercials that variously extol the tax benefits of a regulated marijuana market or warn of the threat mass legalization poses to communities.
Measure backers promise financial rescue for the state's cash-strapped schools, police agencies and social service providers, saying legalization could generate more than $1 billion in tax revenue.
"This is an historic first step toward ending cannabis prohibition," said Richard Lee, president of an Oakland medical marijuana dispensary and Oaksterdam University, a school dedicated to pot.
Lee, whose school specializes in pot law and cultivation, donated more than $1 million for the petition drive to qualify the measure. Proponents said they hope to raise as much as $10 million for the campaign.
The pro-pot coalition has signed on with a prominent San Francisco political consulting firm, SCN Strategies. Proponents also are working with an Internet fundraising firm, Blue State Digital, that helped create the Web network for Barack Obama's presidential campaign.
"This isn't your teenager's cannabis initiative. ... This was carefully crafted to build a winning coalition of supporters," said Dan Newman, a partner with SCN Strategies. His firm includes veteran Democratic strategist Ace Smith, son of former San Francisco District Attorney Arlo Smith.
The initiative will face dogged opposition from law enforcement, church and anti-drug groups.
"This will be a serious campaign," said John Lovell, a lobbyist for the California Peace Officers Association, a group organizing opposition. "They will raise and spend $10 million to $15 million. We will raise a fraction of that. And we will win ...
"The fact is that you can't make a case for legalization of another mind-altering substance."
Bishop Ron Allen, president of the International Faith-Based Coalition, a Sacramento group representing 3,600 congregations, said "angry church leaders" will do "whatever it is going to take to fight this to the very end."
Marijuana has been legal for medical use in California since voters passed another ballot measure, the Compassionate Use Act, in 1996.
Allen, a former crack addict who said he started out smoking marijuana, said his worries over wider legalization have been stoked by the explosion in dispensaries growing and selling pot for medical users. He said pot bought in those dispensaries is being resold on the streets of his Oak Park community.
The new initiative would allow California residents to cultivate up to 25 square feet of pot and possess or transport up to 1 ounce. It would include fines and criminal sanctions for providing marijuana to minors.
The initiative would allow cities to tax pot sales and regulate how much pot can be sold legally. It would permit individual cities to ban local sales but let citizens possess and consume marijuana.
Proponents point to a state Field Poll in April that found 56 percent of voters supported taxing and legalizing pot.
Opponent Lovell said voter attitudes will change quickly once they ponder the implications of legalizing pot for general use. Lovell rallied law enforcement groups two years ago to defeat Proposition 5, an initiative that emphasized treatment over jail for nonviolent drug offenders.
He said opponents will argue that legalization would increase drug use among youths and result in more fatal accidents from pot-impaired drivers. "I submit that the support (for marijuana) is illusionary," he said.
52 Comments so far
Show AllOnly 700,000?
"The initiative will face dogged opposition from law enforcement..." That statement seems to fly in the face of many conclusions I've heard voiced by those working in law enforcement and the legal system.
Apparent where the Sacramento Bee stands on this.
My guess, they are including Prison Guard Union in Law Enforcement category, and they are greatly responsible for this nations horrendous number of prisoners.
regulate? control? leave me be with my weed...I'm doing nothing to you...
let me be with my joy in my daily existence as part of this living world...
marijuana is wonderful in so many ways...
dubet: Your position would be mine, but somehow I've always known that, in this society, regulate and control would be the only way to legalization, or even just decriminalization. On the bright side, I never thought they'd let anyone home grow but they are "permitting" 25 square feet. They probably won't let you sell it but the barter economy is still alive and well. And this is one change I wouldn't sacrifice because it is insufficient.
progress is progress, agreed...I will certainly view legal purchase and the right to grow my own for personal use as a huge advance in an historically ludicrous 'war', fueled by boisterous industrial giants...if and when the time comes...
it just frustrates that the entire scenario is a blatant, agenda-laden violation and suppression of personal freedoms within the natural world...
hopefully, this will help many to experience marijuana as a beneficial and enlightening substance, not the negative 'drug' they have been led to believe...
peace, cassandra...
You guys need to read the Initiative before you make these statements!
The Initiative makes room for personal cultivation within a limited garden space in one's home garden and otherwise unregulated and taxed personal consumption of such home grown stuff.
"Personal cultivation and consumption" in the language of the Initiative places NO hinderances on garden tech -a full hydro system could be used- and transportation of up to an ounce and non-sales sharing is also allowed.
This is a really, Really good Initiative and when it becomes Law in California it will provide BOTH a new revenue stream and retail sales system from/for Cannabis, AND the removal of almost all restrictions on personal growth and sharing of this beneficial plant.
Got to:
http://www.taxcannabis.org/
Check out the language for yourself.
STOP TRUSTING the obviously biased-against reports in the newspapers without examination of the facts!
-matti.
Until Ron Paul's HR 1866 is enacted into law, nothing CA does to legalize the crop will come to fruition. The DEA still has the power.
HR 1866 does not go as far as the "Tax Cannabis" Initiative.
It only legalizes non-psychoactive cannabis where States have already done so, this Initiative also allows municipalities to legalize and tax psychoactive cannabis.
So while HR 1866 is as over due as this potential California Law, it would not mitigate tension with the Feds on this issue if it were passed.
I believe that this fall, Californians are going to tell the DEA to piss up a rope and the Feds will find themselves in no position of "power" at all.
matti,very true, the H.R.1866 Paul Bill only covers Industrial Hemp in states like North Dakota who have licencing mechanisms.I think what maxpayne was referring to was D.E.A. scheduling, which is the same for all Cannabis Sativa, Indica or Ruderalis, regardless of the T.H.C. content.Cheers
johnny hempseed and matti,
I can't argue with that but I would say that HR 1866 would be a huge leap and closer to shutting down the taboo on MJ.
As for the THC brand, I'm afraid that I'll have to stay away from that one until drug testing for employment excludes THC but I don't oppose it personally.
I wished that it could be so that Californians will revolt en masse against the DEA and the Feds but I have yet to find that ever having worked from a historical perspective. I'm afraid that HR 1866 is the only true gateway so far.
maxpayne,see vote hemp.com for the status of H.R.1866 and state initiatives and bills. By the way the last Hemp Canvas I bought was Chinese,and Canadian Hemp Seed is delicious.I would like to support U.S. farmers. Cheers
"The initiative will face dogged opposition from law enforcement, church and anti-drug groups."
Thanks to the recent SCOTUS decision on allowing corporate funding of candidates, we can expect some heavy hitters from the religious and pharmaceutical industries to spend a lot of money in this campaign.
To say nothing of misters Jonnie Walker, Jack Daniels and Jim Beam.
0r those laddies might just buy some land north of San Francisco with those funds.
Legalization would open a mighty fine slice of pie to some corporate entity who could create the McBong Experience or The Grooviest Place on Earth. And a well crafted compromise such as the article speaks of surely provides for corporate domination of the trade, since that will draw corporate support and facilitate taxation later.
And then there's the tourist trade. If this passes, you-all are coming to California next Christmas, aren't you?
Some of those conservative hotel and restaurant and store owners may have divined that.
"Gee, conscience, wallet; wallet, conscience -- which way do I vote?"
Cash and fur should fly.
I suspect this will reach the Governator's desk, though he might take a toke and kill it with a stroke.
The population that rises for the Mary Jane ticket has been bruised by 0 and Pel0si's betrayal, and may be thinking Green. We won't see a flood of 3rd party victories, no, but we would probably pass a public referendum to reform elections.
The Governator CAN'T "kill" this.
That's the genius of it!
This is an Initiative not a Assembly or Senate bill (despite what the caption tries to say) as far as I understand it is not up for Gubenatorial Veto.
dont forget the Hells Angels. they make billions controlling the trade. they have "legitimate" shell companies.
In canada, one of the pro-legalisation groups is the Canadian Association of Police Chiefs.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/marijuana/marijuana_legalize.html
Go CA Go!
"[D]ont forget the Hells Angels. [T]hey make billions controlling the trade."
Care to provide a reference for that?
Richards said the Angels in B.C. have grown incredibly rich in recent years, in large part due to heavy involvement in the marijuana trade in the 1990s. "The Angels in B.C. were one of the very first groups to industrialize the marijuana business -- setting up and investing in multiple large grows and producing large shipments for export," he said. "The B.C. bud industry has made the Hells Angels, some of them, extremely wealthy."
...
One of the main reasons why the Angels are such a high priority for police is that their power and money has allowed them to infiltrate the legitimate economy. From supermarkets to clothing stores, the Angels have a stake in all kinds of businesses. Indeed, many people in B.C. regularly shop at Angels' businesses without even knowing it.
[http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/specials/websterawards/story.html?id=aa809541-daa3-414d-bc06-582faf1f77aa
Yes, the Angels have been heavily involved in the drug trade for many years. I think I read about it first in Hunter S Thompson's expose in the '60s.
I was really asking for a reference to the "billions" in trade. If they turned around that much money, the Angels are ready to be listed on the stock exchange.
Any time you run into some shit head who still thinks that we must keep cannabis illegal, ask them what it is that cannabis users DO that makes it so necessary. What is the behavior? Do they beat their spouses? Do they molest children? Do they lie us into illegal wars? Do they lower taxes for the already too goddamned rich? Do they wiretap people's phones? Do they go around torturing people from other countries? Do they do ANYTHING that is a danger to others?
Unless someone can point to a behavior that isn't a speculation or a prejudicial GUESS from those who have never tried it, they have NO reason other than they don't LIKE it. GREAT reason to screw with 870,000 Americans a year.
The politicians want it illegal, because it's EASY to lie and say they are being "tough on crime", when they are the ones manufacturing the crime in the first place. Cops like it because they don't have to deal with REAL criminals, they can always screw with peaceful people who don't fight back. The jailers like it because it makes their job easier. Again, they don't have to deal with REAL criminals. Big Pharma likes it because cannabis works for hundreds of things they screw people up with pills over. Alcohol manufacturers like it because they know that people who smoke cannabis drink less.
Are THESE the people we should be listening to? They ALL have a vested, monetary interest in keeping things illegal. It doesn't matter to ANY of them just how much damage it does to keep it illegal, and they don't want to look at history as proof of their selfishness. It's FULL of examples, especially in THIS country.
Go, CA, GO! DO IT. Take back your own bodies from the big money scum who don't see us as CITIZENS, but only as consumers. We are MORE than just those who spend money. Time to take back our human dignity.
You hit it one. Politicians and law enforcement officials often point to anti-pot legislation and use it to demonstrate how "tough" and "moral" they are, which is a powerful distraction from all their other failings fueled by stupidity, corruption and greed.
The only argument that I have heard against pot that makes any sense is basically an admission that the Government has screwed up in the control of behavior-modifying substances such as alcohol and tobacco, and that adding pot to the list of allowed substances will only exacerbate this screw-up.
Having said that, however, I do not see any efforts to ban hang-gliding, mountaineering, bungee-jumping, extreme ski/skate/motorcycle/etc which are arguably significantly more dangerous to individuals and society than toking a little weed.
Driving to work kills more Americans every DAY than cannabis has killed in mankind's history. How does "protecting" people from something that has never killed anyone make any sense at all? More people die from ASPIRIN (about 150 a year) than from cannabis. Why isn't aspirin illegal?
We live in a country where politicians complain about creating a "nanny state", when they pass laws to take away our right to be adults. Meanwhile, they are out whoring for campaign funds every day, and sell us out at the drop of a hat. What is the REAL problem we have, cannabis users or corrupt politicians? Who causes more problems for society, crooked politicians or cannabis smokers?
Cannabis smokers tend to be docile, peaceful people who don't tend to cause issues for others. Politicians go out, lie us into war, etc. I'd MUCH rather be playing music for a room of cannabis smokers than a room of drinkers, and certainly more than a room of politicians.
Time for the politicians to grow up, and admit that it's all been a lie. Start treating us like adults and let us make our OWN decisions for our own bodies and minds, and leave us the hell alone. If we are causing a problem, bust us for that. But to bust people and ruin their lives because they have a plant in their yard is just inexcusable. And the cost of it is just unsustainable.
I can only hope that this passes. "As goes California, so goes the country". I keep my fingers crossed, and believe me, it's hard to type that way.
>>cannabis has killed in mankind's history.<<
You mean like ZERO?
Gary
"As long as the government can arbitrarily decide which substances are legal and which are illegal, then those who remain behind bars for illegal substances are political prisoners."
-- Paul Krassner (1999)
Given the “dire” financial straits of California you’d think that something that’s going to save millions of dollars of tax money that is currently being pissed away enforcing marijuana laws would be a no brainer.
(It will be interesting to see if the right-wingers that have managed to hamstring the world’s seventh largest economy will be able to find the money to continue to persecute and imprison a minority. My guess? The money to defeat this will flow into California like the storm surge of Hurricane Katrina flooding New Orleans.)
Yes, they will have a lot of outside opposition money but there will also be a lot of support money.
I think the key to winning will be to address the "fear" (that will be exploited by the opposition) of access by young people, and to not deny the expected increase in use. Years ago, the Chicago Reader did a cover piece about legalization that was very thorough. Their investigations projected that use would spike for about 5 years as people would be curious. However, after that, use was projected to subside.
When people believe something without any data to support that belief, they will not listen to you if you simply dismiss their belief or even if you produce data that refutes it. And humor always helps.
And, per maxpayne (below, 11:21am), everyone should support Ron Paul's HR1866 to keep the DEA out of it.
I think the main line of support will be from the millions and millions of Californians who regularly use cannabis for fun and pleasure and the tens of millions more who do so irregularly (mostly because it is illegal) but know regular smokers and understand that cannabis is not harmful.
But I agree that the "fear" issue will need to be dealt with.
Based on my reading of the text of the Initiative, I think that those behind it also get this. It allows for municipalities to CHOOSE whether to legalize within their purviews, and I believe that this is an "opt-in" choice. Both of these should -if properly promoted- serve to forestall any "danger to our communities" fears. If your little suburb is afraid that the kids might switch from raiding Mom's medicine cabinet to buying retail cannabis, they can choose not to opt-in and that's that.
Also, as I responded to maxpayne above, I don't believe that HR 1866 covers psychoactive cannabis cultivation fro profit OR retails sales of same for same, so it won't really help much. We still need it though, so we need to all remember to make support for it a priority when voting for Congress later this year.
-matti.
matti: I hope you're right that the CHOICE factor for towns and cities will satifsy those most afraid. It just seems that, over the years, whenever I'm in a conversation about this, someone decides that legalization means their kids can buy cocaine at Wal-Mart and the conversation is over.
I also hope that everyone understands the Tenth Amendment implications of this.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
>>If your little suburb is afraid that the kids might switch from raiding Mom's medicine cabinet to buying retail cannabis, they can choose not to opt-in and that's that.<<
Ah, but you need to be 21 to buy cannabis retail by the bill.
Too bad CA has earthquakes...
Gary
"If the government can't keep drugs away from inmates who are locked in steel cages, surrounded by barbed wire, watched by armed guards, drug-tested, strip-searched, X-rayed, and videotaped – how can it possibly stop the flow of drugs to an entire nation?"
–- Ron Crickenberger
anywhere, where freedom has to be petition, the human is on the defense
edweg
Better than undefended!
It's 420 somewhere in the world.
and in some places its always 420
"Allen, a former crack addict..."
None more knee jerk reactionary conservative than a reforming addict, unless maybe its a closeted conservative homosexual. Psychotics rule.
Lets not forget reformed prostitutes. Way down on the list are cured nicotine addicts. I'm one of them (for 25 years), and cigarette smoke does annoy the hell out of me mostly because I have COPD, but I still refrain from being an ass about it. Closeted conservative homosexuals are some of the most dangerous people on the planet. They are not reformed from anything, but are repressing and perverting the most basic instinct of the species, that is, their natural sexual orientation.
Psychotics do indeed rule. It's a sad state of affairs, but then the three Religions of the Book have always been sexually twisted.
Yes, just read about the lives of the Saints. Augustine of Hippo is one of my favorite hypocrites.
two good documentaries on cannabis last night on the CBC. heres links to streamed video.
Nature of things:
[http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/natureofthings/2010/downsideofhigh/
and
[http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/Shows/Doc_Zone
click on CanaBiz
I read recently the USA was the largest pot producer ( probably net worth).
I would think CA growers would lose in this new scenario.
Pot does impair driving but less than Alcohol and no more than some prescriptions.
“and no more than some prescriptions.”
“Sleep walking, eating or driving, with no memory of the event, has been reported with this medication…”
Ask Tiger Woods about driving while asleep.
It still seems to me to be the most likely explanation for Tiger running into a fire hydrant in his next door neighbor’s yard, then, with his face all cut to pieces, to be lying in the grass and snoring just a couple minutes after the accident.
The press reported that Woods had taken Ambien on "that night". Ambien is a powerful, psychotropic sedative.
I googled Tiger Woods Ambien and found reports where one of his alleged gal pals said that they had Ambien fueled, wild and crazy “relations.”
Back in the day, 714’s fueled lots of wild and crazy relations. Samples were passed out like breath mints at nursing homes. The little folder the sample came in had a great flatline graphic and the slogan “The proof is in the EEG.”
Never got myself plugged into an EEG machine so I’ll just take their word for it.
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Or.....every generation invents this stuff for the first time.
"Impaired driving ability" is the last resort of the fascists whenever they want an excuse to deny people their rights.
The automobile has always been a Trojan horse for police intrusion into people's lives and privacy, but cleverly disguised and marketed as the freedom of the road.
Think of all of the personal information (and money) people have to give to the insurance companies and the DMV just to have a license and a vehicle.
Compare that to buying train fare.
Seen from this perspective, it's mass transit that brings freedom, not car ownership.
Making Marijauna is not a health issue. It is not done out of concern for anything BUT Profits.
If profit was the motive, Mexican weed would not be 50% seed by weight/volume.
I live in Mexico and can assure you that landrace mexican cannabis is top grade if grown and handled by experienced and knowledgable persons, profit is the most important motive for traficking to the usa people buy cheap and sell at an amazing markup due to the fact that they arent selling the cannabis anymore but the risk of getting it there hence they have no reason to improve quality as it will be sold anyway with a huge profit margin thanks to the usa government.
In the US, many legally make money off the present MJ system, including law enforcement, attorneys, politicians, and the jail and prison system. Getting them to face the truth that prohibition causes crime, including something like 2 9/11s of homicides in the US/year*, is extremely difficult, because it might lead to a shrinkage in their business.
* This figure is due to all illegal drugs, not just MJ.
Great news altough I think the possible tax revenue emphasis of the backers of this measure is very naive to say the least but unsurprising in a country that places such importance on material wealth, the focus should be the ethical and moral aspects of curtailing the freedom of thought as cannabis is a plant that when used produces changes in consciousness, so the main reason of prohibition is to limit the danger to the status quo of people questioning it.
Also the production cost of cannabis is extremely low, what you people in the usa pay is an inflated price that will deflate to nothing, here in Mexico its possible to acquire a gram of 4 stars material for 7 cents of a dollar and its illegal, imagine how much the price will go down once it becomes legal!.
Another thing to consider is that in 25 square feet its feasible to grow 8 plants that could probably yield 125 grams each wich gives a total of 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) that is much more than a responsible user can consume in a year!, so expect a whole lot to be given away for free and upstart cannabis cafes to sell paraphernalia, candies and soft drinks rather than the actual cannabis. For why pay absurd post prohibition prices once given the oportunity to legally grow your own?.
Anyway im glad the legalization movement is getting stronger as cannabis and psychedelic drugs are just what our sick world society (especially the usa) needs in this time of ecological, social and economical crisis, for its important to remember that cannabis is the spearhead, all the other illegal drugs will also become legal once the lies and propaganda fed to the masses by world governments is exposed.
The dominoes are about to start falling down, and I for one will forever refuse to pay a cent of cannabis taxes as I already have in this wretched miserable and FAILED war on some drugs and its users.
If they catch you with this flower in your pocket they can take away your rights.
It takes a few sigs to get it on the ballot. That's a good amount. As for the mj rap. I know plenty of old farts that still partake, work a good job, raised a great fam, and don't spot you road kill. I'm just sorry I left Oregon...dang. As for taxing...when's the last time you bought a beer on the street?
Oh ya......wwoooohhoooo
4:20, 4:20, 4:20 long years....