Marijuana Policy

Marijuana Policy Subtopics:

Hemp

Obama, YouTube, and Marijuana Legalization

As I discussed last night, yesterday's special YouTube Interview with the President conspicuously -- though predictably -- excluded the top-rated questions from the contest, all of which had to with legalizing marijuana. So now everyone's calling out YouTube for censoring their own forum, the whole purpose of which was to ask Obama the questions that got the most online votes.

Since YouTube publicly credited itself with deciding which questions were asked, I guess it's only fair that they take the blame for blatantly ignoring the single biggest constituency that participated in their forum. But let's not forget that it's the President himself who has twice failed to form even one intelligent sentence in response to the marijuana questions that continue to dominate these forums. He's proven that he can't or won't discuss this issue seriously, so if YouTube sought to avoid another embarrassing controversy, it's at least partially the President's fault for setting such pathetic precedent.

Obama Avoids Questions About Legalizing Marijuana (Again)

Another online Q&A contest concluded Monday without any straight answers from the President about why marijuana remains illegal. YouTube, which sponsored the forum, declined to ask the President a single marijuana-related question, despite overwhelming public demand.

As was the case with every previous online forum of this sort, questions about marijuana legalization were not only prominent, they were by far the most popular vote-getters.

These are the top three highest-rated questions from the entire contest:

"Mr. President, When you asked the country to give you questions, one of the most asked was "Are you going to legalize Marijuana". When you read it, you laughed like it wasnt serious. Why is that?"
None, Florida
1,906 Votes

"What are your plans for cannabis legalization?"
Anonymous, Oklahoma
1,783 VotesÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â

"Why don't you legalize marijuana, it seems like a great way to gain tax money, and people should have to right to use it if they please, and it would cripple gang activity? Do you plan to?"
Lussy Picker, Kentucky
1,766 VotesÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â

Sadly, none of these questions were answered. In contrast, the most popular question that wasn't about marijuana received 1,331 votes and, yes, the President answered that one. It was about net neutrality, which Obama says he supports. So, at least we'll continue to enjoy free speech on the internet, even as the White House pretends not to hear us.

Incredibly, this political popularity contest was broken up into categories including Jobs & the Economy, Health Care, Energy & Environment, Foreign Policy & National Security, Education, Financial Reform, and Government Reform, yet it was the "Other" section which drew the most votes, due entirely to its emphasis on legalizing marijuana. "Other" has become a de-facto euphemism for drug policy reform in several of these White House sponsored forums, which wouldn't keep happening if "Crime & Drug Policy" were given its own well-deserved category alongside the other issues that supposedly encompass the modern political landscape.

Instead, the whole online voting process has become a self-evident mockery, as the contest's democratic structure is violated time and again simply to avoid answering one simple question. But if you're frustrated by all of this, don't be. We're winning the online debate, and we're doing so at a time when online outreach is important enough to the White House that they keep coming back for more.

Obama Launches YouTube Forum on Legalizing Marijuana

Once again, the President wants to know what you think about marijuana policy. His latest online voting forum is sponsored by YouTube, and you can submit your questions about marijuana legalization either on video or in writing.

Participants are asked to focus their questions on how legalization will impact the following areas:

Jobs & the Economy
Health care
Energy & Environment
Foreign Policy & National Security
Education
Financial Reform
Government Reform

After looking around a bit, I've noticed that some internet trolls have been attempting to disrupt the dialogue by submitting questions that have nothing to do with the legalization of marijuana. Some of the categories include a number of non-marijuana-related questions, so please click over there and use your up and down votes to keep the conversation focused by making sure the marijuana questions stay at the top in each section.

With all the problems facing our nation, obsessively discussing marijuana legalization on the internet is more important than ever. After all, if people get sick of hearing about this, there's only one way to shut us up.

Update: Just kidding. I'm pretty sure the forum isn't intended to discuss marijuana legalization exclusively. But you'd almost think it was, considering how many people have questions for the President about why our marijuana laws haven't been fixed yet. I wonder how many more of these online votes we have to dominate before we get a straight answer.

An Awesome Marijuana Debate on the McLaughlin Group

When you're seeing a discussion like this on the McLaughlin Group, you know marijuana reform has gone mainstream:

On a program that's frequently characterized by fervent debate and hostile exchanges, often to the point of being unbearable, the guests actually seem to be largely in agreement about moving beyond marijuana prohibition. Wow. We've come a long, long way.

Marijuana Expo Draws 20,000 to LA Convention Center

Another short video from Mike Gray, for Common Sense for Drug Policy. This one is from Todd McCormick's recent THC Expo in Los Angeles -- as Mike describes it, the "[l]argest marijuana merchandising exhibit in US History," "draw[ing] crowds and exhibitors from all over the world to the Los Angeles Convention Center." This could not happen if marijuana were not basically accepted by society, or a large part of it, despite the retrograde laws that still see thousands arrested daily. View the first video in the series, "Retirees Demand Marijuana," here. In case anyone doesn't know who Mike Gray is, by the way, you should know that he's a distinguished filmmaker and author, whose credits include the late 1970s Jane Fonda-Jack Lemmon-Michael Douglas movie The China Syndrome, as well as extensive work on the Star Trek: The Next Generation series. In drug policy he is well known as author of the book Drug Crazy, possibly the best introduction to the madness of the drug war yet written. (Mike's a member of our advisory board too.)

Video: Milton Friedman on Marijuana Legalization

Even in a time of Democratic ascendancy, conservative voices for legalization remain important. This video of Milton Friedman discussing marijuana prohibition, posted by MPP, was brought to my attention in an email recently. Check it out, as well as the second part of it at MPP-TV.

Check out this interview with Friedman about legalization of all drugs too.

States Don't Need Federal Permission to Legalize Marijuana, Part II

Oh man, look what's happening in Los Angeles. Yeah, I'd say we have all the evidence we need to conclude that the federal government can't do a damn thing to prevent states from implementing their own drug laws. Obama's position on medical marijuana may be better than Bush's was, but it almost makes no difference when the people take matters into their own hands.

If California voters were to legalize marijuana by referendum, does anyone seriously think the Feds are going to stop them?

Yes, The Case Against Marc Emery is Political

In case anyone forgot, the U.S. Dept. of Justice is still trying to extradite famous Canadian marijuana activist Marc Emery for selling marijuana seeds to American customers. But they want everyone to know that the case has nothing to do with his political views:

"We've been very clear it had nothing to do with Mr. Emery's political stand," said Emily Langlie of the U.S. District Attorney's Office in Seattle. [Forbes]

Seriously? Then what the hell did former DEA boss Karen Tandy mean when she said this?

"Today's arrest of Mark (sic) Scott Emery, publisher of Cannabis Culture magazine and the founder of a marijuana legalization group, is a significant blow not only to the marijuana trafficking trade in the U.S. and Canada, but also to the marijuana legalization movement."
â¦
"Hundreds of thousands of dollars of Emery's illicit profits are known to have been channeled to marijuana legalization groups active in the United States and Canada. Drug legalization lobbyists now have one less pot of money to rely on." [Seattle Post-Intelligencer]

There's no way to spin it and I can't imagine why they'd even bother trying. The DEA said it was political, so it's political. Lying about it now serves no purpose other than to tacitly acknowledge that political prosecutions are a bad thing.

The war on marijuana is considerably less popular than it was even a couple years ago when the crusade against Emery began. Now that the debate over marijuana laws is rapidly gaining acceptance in the political mainstream, the DEA's petty motivations for targeting Marc Emery have become such an embarrassment that federal prosecutors would rather lie shamelessly than admit what they're doing.

Under no circumstances will the prosecution of Marc Emery bring glory or even respect to the drug war trophy-hunters that undertook this obscene vendetta. The guy sold goddamn pot seeds on the internet and making a really big deal of out it will serve only to remind everyone that marijuana grows on trees.

Cool "History of Weed" Video from Showtime "Weeds" Program

A precisely two minute YouTube ad for the Showtime program "Weeds" offers "A Brief History of Weed." The video begins with medical marijuana use documented in China in 2727 BC -- about 2,300 years too early for the Buddha image they use to represent it, but that's nitpicking. Flamethrower imagery at 1:06, representing the beginning of federal marijuana prohibition, is very effective, and post-Prop. 215 marijuana storefront footage is downright exciting. Check it out -- check out the Weeds season premiere on June 8th too. (Via The Daily Dish blog's "Cool Ad Watch.")

Is the Obama Administration Planning a Federal Marijuana Crackdown?

In discussing strategies to reduce drug war violence in Mexico, Attorney General Eric Holder made this troubling remark:

In the interview, Mr. Holder said he was sending an additional 100 agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to the southern border to crack down on the so-called straw gun purchases â in which one person submits to the federal background checks to obtain guns for someone else â that fuel much of the southbound smuggling. And with marijuana sales central to the drug trade, Mr. Holder said he was exploring ways to lower the minimum amount required for the federal prosecution of possession cases. [New York Times]

It's a disturbing comment that provoked curiosity from Pete Guither and Eric Sterling, but the back-story helps to qualify exactly which type of marijuana offenders we're talking about. From a meeting with prosecutors in Baltimore: Â

The officials who met with Holder today quizzed him on a variety of local concerns. For example, Barbara LaWall, the Pima County, Ariz., attorney, said that federal prosecutors in her state were refusing to take cases involving cross-border marijuana seizures of 500 pounds or less.

The result, she said, has been no convictions for hundreds of smugglers caught with about 490 pounds of marijuana. [Baltimore Sun]

So when Holder says he's "exploring ways to lower the minimum amount required for the federal prosecution of possession cases," he's responding to complaints that major traffickers are currently being allowed to walk. Obviously, he's dreaming if he thinks lowering the threshold will intimidate traffickers who've already made it clear that they fear nothing. Our failure to prosecute cases under 500 pounds just shows how ridiculously outmatched we are and any attempt to rectify the situation will only serve to further prove that point.

Regardless, Holder's comment shouldnât be read as a declaration of war against American marijuana users. He's not saying there will be an effort to increase arrests. They are aiming to put more people in prison for pot, however, rather than continuing to systematically pass on cases involving hundreds of pounds.

If Holder wants to reduce Mexican drug war violence, he needs to reduce the drug war itself, not the thresholds for marijuana prosecutions. Believe me, Americans would be happy to grow their pot at home and defund the marijuana cartels entirely.

Subscribe to Marijuana Policy