Oregon Ballot Measure 91: Will Third Time Be The Charm?

As we approach the midterm elections on November 4th, I want to focus on the two statewide voter initiatives that seek to fully legalize marijuana in Alaska and Oregon. This week I will examine the proposal in Oregon, known as Measure 91.

Will the Third Time Be the Charm?

This will be the third time – and, hopefully, the charm time – that Oregon voters have voted on a marijuana legalization proposal. The first initiative, Measure 5 in 1986, the Oregon Marijuana Legalization for Personal Use Act, would have legalized the personal possession and cultivation of marijuana for personal use; it won the support of only 26 percent of the voters. More recently, Measure 80 in 2012, the Oregon Cannabis Tax Act, would have allowed the personal cultivation of marijuana and established a licensing system for the commercial production and sale of marijuana; it came close, with the support of 46.5 percent of the voters.

The latest Oregon initiative, Measure 91, proposed by New Approach Oregon, would legalize the use of marijuana by those 21 and older, and establish a system of licensing, taxing and regulating marijuana under the auspices of the Oregon Liquor Control Board.

Specifically, under this proposal adults would be permitted to possess up to eight ounces of “dried” marijuana and cultivate up to four plants. And they would be allowed to give up to an ounce of marijuana, 16 ounces of marijuana products in solid form or 72 ounces of marijuana products in liquid form, to other individuals 21 and older; they could not be compensated or reimbursed for these transactions. Adults would be allowed to purchase up to an ounce of marijuana, 16 ounces of marijuana products in solid form, or 72 ounces of marijuana products in liquid form from properly registered businesses. These limits are more permissive than those previously approved in Washington and Colorado, and may provide a test of how restrictive a legalization system must be to win the approval of a majority of the voters.

Go to Marijuana.com for the rest of the column.

25 thoughts

  1. HuffPost has an article on The New York Times whatever number of the six pro-legalization editorials in a series.

    NYT excerpt below http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/06/opinion/alaska-oregon-and-the-district-of-columbia-should-legalize-pot.html?_r=1

    Ideally, the federal government would repeal the ban on marijuana, so states could set their own policies without worrying about the possibility of a crackdown on citizens violating federal law. Even though a majority of Americans favor legalization, Congress shows no sign of budging. So it’s better for the states to take the lead than to wait for an epiphany on Capitol Hill that may never come.

    End of excerpt

    I hope the NYT convinces more undecided voters than prohibitionist organizations such as SAM and the Gang persuade voters to vote against legalization.

    Are the prohibitionists running several different kinds of anti-cannabis ads, and often? What kind of a dent are their ads making? Any more polling? Where are the pockets of prohibition? Gotta be something in the online Oregon papers.

    I’m thinking if NYT editorial board is pro-legalization, what kind of an effect is this having on Cuomo? I don’t know why he’s being such a limp dick about it.

  2. Dear Nanny State,

    If I’m really good and clean my room will you please let me have a little pot and a few plants
    in the back yard?

    Thank you nanny state, I know that you know how to run my life better than I can.

    Yours truly,

    The Duped Sheep

  3. Since Oregon is a Democratic state for the most part, the 2012 rejection must be laid at the hands of liberals who aren’t in favor of personal freedom. We already know which way the cultural conservatives are going to vote but they’re not a majority here by any means.

    A nannystater from either the left or right is still a nannystater.

  4. Perhaps we could encourage Congress to move on this issue by repeatedly emphasizing Harry J. Anslinger’s testimony before Congress:

    “When a darkie smokes marijuana, he thinks he’s just as good as a white man.”

    The blatant, keep-them-down racism may have sold in the Congress at the time, but it is vile anathema to modern America.

  5. Galileo Galilei, “The blatant, keep-them-down racism may have sold in the Congress at the time, but it is vile anathema to modern America.”

    Dude, that is modern America. Why do you think marijuana is still illegal? It is so innocence people can keep being arrested. Why you think there so many asshats trying to keep their neighbors from voting? We’re trying to legalize weed, while they are working on keeping their neighbors from voting in 2014… Who on this short list is working toward a less racist and better future? Hint: not the people trying to prevent voting… …And most of time marijuana is made legal by The People Voting, not thanks to the “leadership” of the parties.

  6. If this law passes, it will be the equivalent of the plantation owners giving “the good darkies” a travel pass. It should not be confused with real freedom.

    The state has no business telling free people what they can consume or how much of it they can possess.

    [Editor’s note: Your equating the current ballot initiative in Oregon to end cannabis prohibition as being the political and moral equivalent to slavery being allowed to continue is as hyperbolic as it is inaccurate.

    In espousing a purely libertarian viewpoint you’re deluding yourself from the substantive and positive policy outcomes when citizens vote to end cannabis prohibition.

    Guns, alcohol products, pharmaceuticals, autos, cell phones are all legal, but with clear (and usually obvious) prohibitions and regulations that don’t render the citizen ‘not free’.

    Rather than denigrate the hard work of advocates who raise the money and employ the talent to end cannabis prohibition laws because they don’t comport to libertarian fantasy (even strident libertarians should be actively supporting the base work of actually ending the prohibition…most especially since libertarians are not actually changing any cannabis laws at any level in the US), after prohibition has ended, politically organize effectively to more ideally shape the law to the wants and needs of citizen cannabis consumers.]

  7. Dear Editor,

    No I am equating a permission based privilege to a permission based privilege. In both instances another entity controls a peaceful person, which is not consistent with freedom….and you know it.

    Recognition of who owns you and who doesn’t comes easier to some of us. As far as the hard work of others, sure I appreciate it and have done a good bit myself. That doesn’t change the fact that free people do not require permission to control their own property or body.


    [Editor’s note: Unless one chooses to live in a cave and off the land…no person on earth is genuinely ‘free’. However, that is a far larger philosophical discussion beyond ending cannabis prohibition and replacing the failed policy with constitutional and free market-friendly alternatives that are supported by citizens and their elected policy makers.

    Philosophy is great. Political science more applicable when changing public policy.]

  8. Bob, the only part I don’t like is, “they could not be compensated or reimbursed for these transactions.”

    Freed people do pay taxes and are regulated, by laws they write, not have written for them by crooks.

    Look, having a Marijuana Business is different from have extra bud on hand that you can distribute to friends. There is no reason to prohibit low level sales between friends. However, I can see how people would try to make the excuse that their Marijuana Business isn’t one and they don’t have to pay taxes or follow regulations, which would be bullshit.

    However, the State does have the Right to Prohibit you from using money to purchase marijuana because Federal Law already Prohibits it. When State and Federal Law say the same thing, the state can say to the Feds, “Look we are trying to respect the Federal Guidelines on Marijuana; it is right there is in black and white.”

    Once legal Federally, the States will not have as much legal standing to ban the selling of marijuana, not at a licensed distributor. Unless they crave out a Federal Exception. Sure cigarettes are completely controlled by the State Laws on them, but that system is a complete mess with different taxes rates in each state and cigarettes are dangerous use to require a national policy, unlike marijuana which is only dangerous if you try really, really hard to make it dangerous.

  9. The State Laws on Cigarettes are designed to raise revenue and create crime by having different tax rates in each state for the same exact thing. Why, exactly? Does cancer cost more or less in Alabama then it does in California?

    I would hate to see the logic applied to cigarettes continue to be applied to marijuana and marijuana products. We do need to low ball the regulations and the taxes on marijuana or we will still be supporting disordered laws which don’t fit the subject they are trying to address.

    Governor Hickenlooper cracks me up. He said legalizing marijuana was a mistake, but it isn’t their job to re-illegalize it. Double talk? What I heard was, “Don’t legalize in 2014 in your state, keep the money flowing to Colorado for a couple more years”.

  10. @ Just an Observer,

    So, I just want to make sure I get your point correctly. Don’t blame the mass of conservatives who you, as you’ve said, know will vote against legalization, instead blame the small percentage of liberals who will go also vote against legalization. Very interesting logic.

    How about throwing in the libertarians who vote against legalization because they’re against taxing and regulating? Or how about the black-marketeers who stand to lose some of their customers?

    I think I understand your agenda.

  11. @ Bob Constantine,

    With all due respect, I’m willing to bet that you very readily drive the streets built by our “nanny state,” and drink water from your tap inspected by our “nanny state,” eat food also inspected by our “nanny state.” You may also collect SS and medicare from our nannies, as far as I know.

    You seem to have a bizarre belief that we as modern humans can function without a government. Did you read that in Ayn Rand or Lewis Carroll?

  12. Editor, I think what Bob means is that marijuana hasn’t changed and become something that requires this much work/regulations/law pertaining to/abuse suffered under such bullshit.

    He is saying replacing bullshit prohibition with bullshit legalization is still bullshit!

    If you can still be put in jail or be fined into the ground for something you should not jail or fined over, well you are not a freed person. As long as Law Enforcement People are free to arrest and harrass potheads with weed as as the excuse whether “legal” or nor isn’t very relevent.

    You will still lose your house, and that means you are not free nor are we living in a free land when such flismy bullshit can be used as an excuse for official actions. It is more like marijuana is becoming half-legal.

    As even the way our government has gone about enforcing our current prohibition isn’t even legal. Right now, they can’t be relied upon to even handle marijuana cases and achieve anything resembling justice. Nearly everyone in the system knows it is just an excuse to avoid actually applying “due process”. When it comes to marijuana you’re guiltly first, never presumed innocent of endangering or selling to children just because you walked or drove near a school. We got thousands of professionals throughout our country enforcing non-sensical, blantly illegal laws on a daily basis.

    Like in VA, if you have 21 grams of marijuana, you will be sent to jail for dealing, without any evidence ever presented to anyone that you were in fact dealing. This is trial by hearsay. Even if marijuana is illegal, laws structured this way are not legal either!!!

    [Editor’s note: The essence of the question is to either continue with cannabis prohibition (where the offense is a moral turpitude) or replace it with a system that looks more-than-not like tax and control policies already in place for other problematic adult commerce. Looking back at how the previous laws, under a previous set of moral beliefs, were enforced is not as good of use of energy than looking forward.

    In WA, for example, prior to the voters in 2012 casting off the shackles of the basic prohibition, over 11,000 cannabis consumers were arrested annually. Today, the number is likely between 100-200. When police interface with a cannabis consumer in a state like WA/CO (and hopefully soon in AK, OR and DC too), under legalization, they can’t readily get a search warrant to start digging into citizens’ private spaces (home, office other vehicles, etc…) to uncover marijuana-related, and what ever else they happen upon. Lastly, with no incentive of civil forfeiture money or notching an arrest record for the purposes of receiving additional federal grant money (to make even more arrests), the ending of prohibition itself has massive social and political benefits (ie, the ‘drug dealer’ pre-prohibition becomes Chamber of Commerce-like political player at local/state level post-Prohibition).

    After the basic prohibition comes to an end by voter initiative, legislation or court decision, those organizations and individuals concerned with cannabis cultivators, sellers and consumers will continue to cease to exist as clearly there is other cannabis-related reform work to be done (home cultivation; no drug testing for home cannabis use in the workplace; scientifically valid DUID testing; reasonable taxes, fees and regulations; and commercial places where adults can responsibly consume cannabis in the same manner alcohol consumers do.

    But, first, wherever possible, end the basic prohibition first and most extensively…and know that more follow- up work politically and legally is needed.]

  13. @Keith,
    Thank you for moderating the obstructive extremists on all sides of the marijuana legalization debate so we can get some sensible legislation moving forward.
    Any seasoned marijuana activist, or any lobbyist for that matter, knows that considerable compromise has to be made to get legislation to the ballot or passed by Congress.
    I have observed silently over the years the extreme “liberal” or “libertarian” rants that oppose anything but “perfect” legislation to end prohibition, and thereby oppose all moderate efforts to legalize. My silence was purchased by big donations like Jeff Bezos from Amazon who support legalization and NORML on one hand and prohibition on the other by donating to zero income tax groups like Americans for Prosperity.
    But in 2008 i heard the respected libertarian and marijuana advocate, Ron Paul, get up in front of a crowd in Austin and say “Abolish the DEA” (cheers) Then, without missing a breath, Ron yelled, “Abolish the Department of Education!” crowd response: (WTF?!)
    Then in 2012, Washington’s legalization movement was opposed by a large group of so called “liberals” who claimed that any tax on marijuana was wrong… And were apparently willing to risk years of extended and protracted full-out prohibition as some insane definition of “compromise” to their end.
    Now the greedy sheep in wolf’s clothing have come to spread their madness on these blog pages and i have to wonder who is donating to THEIR cause? Is this the last stand of prohibition before early voting begins in a couple of weeks? “This hard earned compromise for marijuana legalization is not perfect, therefore we oppose it, therefore strengthening prohibition, but we really ARE all FOR legalization… Yeah… Thats it.”
    And when you peel back their extremist dogma like i did with Weed the People back on the column about marijuana revenue hitting “3billion” (where i used a great analogy to taxing shit during the Great Stink of London in 1858) and i asked Weed, “How would you propose to clean up America’s shit ( a seemingly “free” and “God-given” right as libertarians like to say about growing weed) … without taxing and regulating everyone in the participating economy?”
    To my surprise, the libertarian answer was, “where do you find the time to come up with those words” and when all else fails, “Dont you get it? God made weed so we shouldn’t tax it!”
    Admittedly floored by the fantastic lack of logic when referring to taxes and Creation, i was even more surprised when Dave Evans had the last word and said, “Jesus said quit whining and pay your taxes.” Considering Jesus took the holy healing oils (cannabis or otherwise) that were designated by Exodus 30-22 and gave them to the sick and imprisoned, i believe we have a revolutionary example of moderation.
    I am compelled to look even further into the merging and diverging ideologies that are emerging from our efforts to end prohibition:
    Back on May 3rd of this year, i was marching with NORML in Austin, TX up from Cesar Chavez on 2nd to the state capitol. I helped make signs, and one of my signs held a verse from Mathew 25-37
    “Lord when did we see you hungry and feed you… When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
    “The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did it for me.”
    Perhaps comforted by scripture, or curious to read, a few of the mothers strolling their children marched around me. These were members of a new conservative group called MAMMA, or mothers of autistic children that were attempting to support legalization efforts while maintaining their low to no income tax Republican agendas. I often wonder how helpless it must feel to have prohibition destroying your family’s well being while knowing your party supports a prohibitive agenda?
    At what expense have libertarians served themselves to the priests of prohibition like Judas did to Jesus for 30 pieces of silver? Will they hang themselves when they realize their betrayal? When they understand what we are sacrificing to legalize and regulate commercially taxed marijuana so that we CAN grow self sustainably our own medicine, shelter, food and fuel?
    Appealing to the bible, particularly the book of Mathew, appears to have some profound dialogue not only useful for educating conservative libertarians, but even educating us all about the history of prohibition itself, both through the prohibition of Christianity during the first 300 years A.D., and through marijuana, taxes and agricultural parable itself.
    One such example is in “Paying Taxes to Ceasar,” where Jesus answers the question “is it right to pay taxes to Caesar,” by saying, “Give to Ceasar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.” Was this a revelation of agricultural sustainability? In other words, what do we value? The money we don’t create? Or the hemp seed we planted? We reap what we sow.
    Another good example of compromise in the book of Mathew is in The Parable of the Two Sons. One son refused his father’s orders to go work in the vineyard. The other son said he would but did not go. When Jesus asks “which son did what his father wanted” the students answer, “the first son.”
    Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, the tax collector and the prostitutes are entering the Kingdom of Heaven ahead of you. For a John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him. But the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this you did not repent and believe him.”
    In further reading, Jesus asks Simon, “From who do the Kings

  14. “…of the earth collect duty and taxes– from their own sons or from others?” Peter answered, “From others.”
    “Then the sons are exempt,” Jesus said to him. “But so we may not offend them, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours.”
    For those of you who are libertarian and still reading, the moral of this parable is not to go fishing in hopes of finding rare Biblical-era coins inside your first catch. What the parable does for me is reveal the many different ways we can define tax and regulation, whether with work, recreation and sharing our catch. We all have the born desire to sustain ourselves which is why we save, grow and invest in abundance… But we also tax and share within towns and societies for shared sustenance, security, sanitation, public recreation and even worship. We tax with the knowledge and hope that these services will be available to our sons and daughters for future generations to enjoy; not only ourselves in the present time.
    What is truly inspiring is that despite the continued opposition to compromise and sensible marijuana regulation from no-income tax Libertarians the majority of Americans aren’t buying the propaganda. The availability and access to the truth by technology and classic American distrust of the establishment or corporate authority has forced us as a nation to look under every rock for prohibitionist dogma and shed disinfecting light on every debate.
    I couldn’t be more proud of us as a nation watching Washington DC, Oregon Alaska and Florida tip us over the edge into the majority for sensibly regulated and commercially taxed hemp and marijuana. Our path has been bisect on all sides by the tyranny of evil men, and yet we continue the common struggle, even when it means we have to compromise and educate our enemies while they poison us with more lies and deception.
    We will end prohibition. We will spend revenue from commercially taxed marijuana on education. We will subsidize the self sustaining farmer who will grow the building materials that will become the head corner stones of our future. And above all, we will let our prisoners of prohibition be free, and provide hemp and marijuana as food and medicine for education instead of offering incarceration for the profit of an unjust quota.
    We can do this together. And in the words of Malala, the well earned recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, i will tell my enemies “You will want this education for your children.”
    Now get out there, read your NORML voters guide, and vote Democratic this election season! And may God Bless NORML and God Bless America!

  15. @Evening Bud,

    My beliefs are based in the belief that all people own themselves and no people own others. I try to remain consistent there.

    The non-initiation of aggression principle seems valid to me, sorry that you find peaceful human interactions bizarre. BTW – You would have lost that bet you proposed. Peace.

  16. @ Bob Constantine,

    I somehow understand your beliefs: taxes somehow represent serfdom or slavery? Yes? We should be free to completely live our own lives–I agree with that. We should be free to build out own stretches of road, or inspect our own water or food? Not sure I find that viable, unless you have a decent parcel of land, and an unpolluted stream of water running through it. But for inner city folks, that’d be a tad tougher.

    Concerning roads, say, we build that small stretch of road in front of our own house: does that give us the right charge others for passing through it? I know this discussion probably belongs on another forum, but I’m just fishing around, trying to understand exactly where you’re coming from.

    As for finding peaceful interactions bizarre, I’m afraid, my friend, I again don’t completely understand where you’re coming from. I do apologize if I came off as confrontational–I know I need to temper that sometimes. But again, I’m just wondering if you’re advocating for the dissolution of government.

    Thanks for the reply and best wishes always.

  17. Hi Julian, the actual quote from Jesus was, “You hypocrites/You wicked people, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax.”

    Jesus was having none of that of Bullshit!

    Taxes are based on a level of economic activity. Excise Taxes tend to be Bullshit, however and I can’t see how the State declaring an ounce of marijuana being worth $50 in taxes regardless of the actual value of the ounce of marijuana is indeed a bullshit tax. This is what is going to keep happening now that people think marijuana is the same thing Alcohol!!! An excise tax on Alcohol makes a little more sense as we can actually calculate a value of the damage alcohol does to society on a drink by drink basis–because it is a poison.

    Telling people to regulate Marijuana like Alcohol is getting them to believe marijuana also has a toke by toke or brownie by brownie cost to society!!!! No one has ever produced any kind of data linking marijuana usage and large amounts of expenditures (not linked to the cost of Prohibition) on dealing with the problems marijuana causes.

    The cart is so far out in front of the horse on this subject…

  18. @Dave
    I believe you may have taken the quote from “Paying Taxes to Caesar” out of context. After saying, “Show me the coin used for paying the tax,” Jesus says, “Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?” It was then when the Pharisees said “Caesar’s” that Jesus said “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.”
    The Pharisees were trying to trap Jesus in his words; careful; it would appear that you are doing the same to yourself; your paraphrase made it sound like Jesus was trying to say “show me the coin…” As if to prove he paid the tax., when in fact he was saying pay the stupid tax, but give to “God what is God’s” Which could be taken to mean anything in Creation, if were to be honest. Please clarify. Youre the same guy that quoted Jesus as saying “quit whining and pay your taxes.”

    The reason you may feel the cart is being put before the horse is because I believe you are missing the metaphor of the parable; Jesus is drawing light to the relative value of currency and Creation. In his comparison he revealed a greater mystery of order, value, regulation and balance required by a faithful, civil, functionate society. People who live in the extremes, or who place too much emphasis on either or arguments over all or nothing arent getting the real picture that life needs to be balanced, regulated and arranged. While i agree with you that alcohol is not a perfect mirror of regulation to marijuana, you have to remember to put into context the corrupt miseducation we are dealing with as the evolving debate on how to regulate what was once prohibited takes life and grows in the United States like our first legal hemp harvest in Colorado last spring… Just put that into perspective in the context of both monetary abd spiritual value of our culture and then imagine what extremes we’ll be arguing about in the future as prohibition comes to its mortal end?
    We (myself included) are designed to make extreme mistakes in order to judge what fair regulation means. Thats what growing upis all about. If a tax is a coin that i must pay but i keep my harvest, what is the value of the coin or the value of my harvest if it can still sustain my family and reap the benefits and securities of a taxed society?
    If we become too focused on the value of the coin, and not enough on the real value of spiritual self sustainability in the parable, or overemphasize the excise tax for commercially taxed marijuana while were still ending prohibition, ywe might over look the value of the harvest; We might overlook the opportunity to lower residential and medical marijuana taxes to sustain our families.
    As a result of arguing against commercial marijuana taxation you will be missing the greater value that the fairly regulated harvest of cannabis will bring to farmers each harvest season without waiting 40 more years for prohibition to end.
    Or even worse, you might find yourself struggling to vote Republican or Libertarian in Texas while simultaneously trying to end prohibition to treat your sick child with medicinal marijuana. Unfortunately for the red voters, Texas Republicans did not move fast enough to establish a marijuana platform save to say Greg Abbott wants to keep prohibition the same. Is Wendy Davis a perfect alternative? Perhaps not; but she is clearly for medicinal and decriminalization and at least open minded for the future, observing those schools being built in Colorado on commercially taxed marijuana. For any of you who are undecided in the state of Texas, youtube the first Davis-Abbott debate and decide for yourselves who wants to end the drug war.

  19. @ Evening Bud,

    I am advocating for the dissolution of coercion based systems. Voluntary human interactions are the best kind in my opinion.

    Freedom is not possible if it is “regulated” or “licensed”. It then becomes a contradiction.

    I think you own yourself, so do I, none of us own others. Granting coercive government the ability to own people and turning a blind eye to that is a bit more cognitive dissonance than I can stand.

    Peace and thank you for the apology.

  20. Yes, Jesus did call them hypocrites. His point about paying taxes was so people would not confuse tributes to God and religion as being the same as having paid taxes. And also, the government sets the tax rate, not God. Trying to use Jesus or God as an excuse for not paying taxes makes one into a hypocrite or wicked person. Jesus pointed this out as money comes from the government, not Jesus or the Church. The church says 10% for them is reasonable. Jesus says the tax rate and tithe are separate, don’t confuse them. Also putting Jesus’s face on money will not make it nontaxable for the idiots out there. That would completely undermine His point not to use Him as such an excuse. “Pay your taxes.”

  21. Julian, to give another example of our societal dyslexia on marijuana: Addiction doctors and treatment professionals. Some are competent and handle marijuana use by their patients correctly, but most still lie to people and tell them crazy things like marijuana is the gateway that lead to their addiction disease. How does one help people get over their drug addiction by lying to them about how addictions happen??? Just doesn’t seem possible to me…

  22. @Dave Evans,
    Good points on the analysis of Paying Taxes to Caesar and on doctors as well. Perhaps the hardest part of getting our point across to the still too afraid or still too-proud-to- pay-their-taxes edge of our society is explaining to people that it’s not legalization that is some kind of lawless brand of anarchy, but in fact it’s what we already have right NOW, PROHIBITION, that is organized, criminal anarchy.
    I’ll never forget when my older brother told me all high on his horse, to my face, that legalizing drugs would be saying to children that “using heroin is alright.” I didn’t even know where to start with him. First, I said, Legalization has always been about regulation and commercial taxation, without which, cartels will continue to terrorize our streets and offer ANYTHING on the black market to our children. But than I said, without decent marijuana regulation, we’re telling our kids to manage their pain with legal oxycodone, vicadin and other pain killers that when the prescription runs out, lead kids to the cheap heroin available that is being exported even more cheaply from Afghanistan today than when the war began 14 years ago!
    I’ll never understand these “no regulation, no taxation” types. They appear to want to belong to some illusionary rich club that has increasingly eluded mainstream society to a few patent holding, cartel running tax evading individuals. I feel like saying, “YOU’RE NOT IN THE RICH CLUB!!! THE CLUB HAS BEEN REDUCED TO ABOUT 10 PEOPLE, AND YOU’RE NOT ONE OF THEM! SO STOP VOTING REPUBLICAN IF YOU WANT TO LEGALIZE WEED! JEEZ!!(Sorry, Jesus, don’t mean to use your name in vain… you know how it is…)”

    I mean, were at a point of Plutocracy so thick in America the Koch Brothers may as well be political candidates. I found it too difficult for people to understand how their petrochemical patents compete with a domestic hemp industry, so I settle on explaining to people that if we don’t regulate marijuana, and get it right and spend the revenue on education, that we will never be able to bring down the cost of health care in this country since the courts let insurance decide the cost of health care instead of doctors and patients.
    Fairly taxed and regulated commercial marijuana… and hemp… will finally take the cost and supply of marijuana out of the hands of the DOJ corrupted by the C.S.Act and put into the hands of doctors and patients that know best what treatments they require and at what cost. More over, it will create politicians that will defend these basic human rights by generating fairly taxed marijuana revenue, instead of repeatedly selling us out like my Head-in-@$$ representative Lamar Smith keeps doing.
    The only thing that gives me any hope in Texas is the recent NORML link to donate to Beto O-Rourke… that and the polls closing in on Greg Abbott by Wendy Davis.
    It’s like there’s something in the air leading up to November elections, but I just can’t identify what it is… Oh well, guess I’ll go home and smoke a bowl and figure it out later.

Leave a Reply