In many, many ways Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin should be commended for leading the charge for marijuana legalization in his state. Vermont would be the very first state to end cannabis prohibition via the legislative process, instead of a voter initiative. It would be a remarkable achievement that could lead to other states following Vermont’s path, such as Minnesota, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, Hawaii, and other relatively progressive states that don’t have the citizen initiative process.

The Vermont Senate passed a landmark legalization bill, sending the measure over the the House. Apparently, prospects of the bill in the Vermont House are shaky, and Governor Shumlin and advocates are rightly putting up a good fight. Governor Shumlin wrote a Times Argus oped, rightly urging the Vermont House to move forward with the legalization measure:

Vermont has a clear choice. As states nationwide and those close to home continue working to enact smarter policies around marijuana, we can be the first state to do it right. We can lift the veil of prohibition that has prevented us from taking rational steps to address all the issues that come with marijuana use that exist right now, given that one in eight Vermonters uses the substance on a monthly basis. Or, we can choose to delay making the right policy choice, continuing to bury our heads in the sand and hope that a policy that has failed for decades will all-of-a-sudden start working.

Governor Shumlin is correct that it is time for Vermont (and all states for that matter) stop willfully ignoring reality about cannabis use. Cannabis is used by too many Americans today, that prohibition is a government boondoggle, just as the failed experiment of alcohol prohibition. A strong majority of Americans and Vermonters agree that it is time to end the failed and harmful policy of cannabis prohibition and legalize and regulate the plant.

While Governor Shumlin is correct to urge the Vermont House to proceed with a legalization bill, he is wrong in his oped, when he demonizes the prospective Massachusetts ballot measure, along with other marijuana products and policies that other states have chosen, or may follow:

The stakes are important. The bill passed by the Vermont Senate would represent the most careful, deliberate attempt to regulate marijuana in America. Before passing the bill, the Senate took testimony from experts, asked the right questions, and learned lessons from those states that have legalized marijuana already. The result is a bill to create a system that would represent a huge improvement over the status quo. It would ban the sale of edibles, which have caused so may problems in Colorado. It would also allow us to drive out the black market and the illegal drug dealers that come with it, do a better job than we currently do of keeping marijuana out of the hands of underage kids, deal with the drugged drivers who are already driving on our roads, address treatment, and educate Vermonters to the harmful effects of consuming marijuana, alcohol and cigarettes.

That approach is in stark contrast to the one proposed in the Massachusetts referendum that will be voted on in November, which would allow edibles that have caused huge problems in other states, smoking lounges, home delivery service, and possession of up to 10 ounces of marijuana. Vermont’s bill allows none of that. If Massachusetts moves forward with its legalization bill while Vermont delays, the entire southern part of our state could end up with all the negatives of a bad pot bill and none of the positives of doing the right thing.

During our campaign to legalize marijuana here in Oregon, for which I was proud to serve as chief petitioner, I was often asked what made Oregon Measure 91 different from the new laws in Colorado and Washington. I would point to the fact that we have learned a lot from those two states and have had the benefit of tailoring our legalization measure to Oregon.

Our campaign argued that having testing standards in place for cannabis-infused edibles and other products would help us avoid Maureen Dowd-like episodes and that allowing for vertical integration of businesses would help us avoid supply issues that plagued early sales in Washington. Additionally, we felt that Oregon’s lower tax rates would help us generate robust sales and move more people out of the unregulated market into the regulated system.

It makes sense that Governor Shumlin can compare and contrast the Vermont legalization bill with the measures in other states, but there isn’t a need to be providing Massachusetts prohibitionists fodder to combat the legalization measure there or ammo to defeat future legalization measures. I wish Governor Shumlin and Vermont advocates luck and I understand that politics is politics, but I would hope that the benefits of the Vermont measure can be highlighted without unnecessarily denigrating the Massachusetts effort, or the policies in practice, or sought by other states.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s conduct in Maricopa County, Arizona, is a national disgrace that should be declared unconstitutional and should be stopped. Jane and Bernie Sanders should be commended for shining a light on Arpaio’s abuses, from racial profiling to neglectful, inhumane treatment of people in his custody. These abuses are un-American and should no longer be allowed in our society.

Jane Sanders visited Arpaio’s “Tent City” jail on Monday to shine a light on the inhumane conditions those in custody live under, including many undocumented families. Sheriff Arpaio wanted to meet with Ms. Sanders and she agreed, pressing “America’s Toughest Sheriff” about racial profiling and the harsh conditions forced upon inmates in the “Tent City” where temperatures can get as high as 130 degrees Fahrenheit.

Bernie Sanders spoke about Sheriff Arpaio in a campaign speech following the encounter with his wife Jane, calling his behavior “unconscionable” and stating, among other things:

“Why don’t you pick on people who have the power to fight back?”

“She asked him about racial profiling, and he didn’t have an answer,” Sanders said. “She asked him about conditions in Tent City and other abuses that he has perpetuated, and he didn’t have an answer. You know what, he cannot have an answer, because what he is doing is un-American and uncivilized.”

Oregon’s first month of taxed marijuana sales netted the state about $3.5 million, exceeding original state projections and showing that the state is poised to have very robust marijuana sales. The tax revenue collected is even months earlier than expected as, after the passage of the 2014 Measure 91 legalization measure, the state wasn’t expected to start taxed sales until October of 2016. The Oregon Legislature passed a bill allowing for the taxed sale of marijuana flowers in existing medical marijuana dispensaries, but not any edibles or other products, to begin at the beginning of 2016.

The state’s financial impact statement mailed with every voters’ pamphlet to every household in Oregon, estimated that marijuana sales would generate between $17 million to $40 million was the program was implemented, the $3.5 collected from just the first month of taxed flower sales, shows that the state is likely to crush the upper end of the state’s initial estimate. The Oregon State Legislative Revenue Office projected that Measure 91 would only generate about $17 million the first year while the financial firm ECONorthwest put the figure at $38.5 million.

After examining the evidence, the state’s financial estimate committee, consisting of members that included future Governor Kate Brown (then Secretary of State) and Portland mayoral candidate Ted Wheeler (serving as State Treasurer), voted to provide the $17 million to $40 million range. Since $3.5 million in taxed flower sales over 12 months equals $42 million, the committee seems to have picked a good range at first blush, with the state hitting just over the upper end. However, sales are likely to increase greatly once the adult-use commercial system is fully implemented.

Since $3.5 million collected from taxed flower sales doesn’t include any sale of infused-edibles or any other marijuana product, Oregon will see greater tax revenues in the future. With cannabis-infused edible making up nearly half of Colorado’s cannabis market, Oregon could easily double the tax revenue generated, if not even more (meeting the most optimistic projections) as consumers become more aware of tinctures, concentrates, topicals and the wide array of products that will be available.

The tax revenue generated doesn’t even take into account all of the benefits the state is experiencing, from the new jobs created; to fewer arrests and citations; to better prioritizing resources. Oregon has a long history as a trailblazer on cannabis, including producing some of the best cannabis in the world. While there are certainly growing pains as the state transitions to a regulated commercial system, the future is bright for the Oregon cannabis industry, so long as laws and regulations don’t unnecessarily stifle the burgeoning market. Prohibitionists often like to crow when tax revenues come in lower than some estimates, but they haven’t had much to crow about in that regard, so they will have to squawk someplace else.

During the latest Super Tuesday, black Chicago activists flew banners across the city skyline criticizing Mayor Rahm Emanuel and State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez for their shameful response to the police killing of 17 year-old Laquan McDonald. The banners read: “Chicago Stands with Laquan, Hillary Stands with Rahm— #ByeAnita #ByeRahm” as the activist group Assata’s Daughter’s decried both Alvarez and Emanuel while also criticizing Hillary Clinton for not condemning Mayor Emanuel strongly enough. While the Democratic front-runner Clinton narrowly won Illinois against challenger Bernie Sanders (along with big victories elsewhere), Anita Alvarez conceded to challenger Kim Foxx, who prevented Alvarez from a third term.

While the Laquan McDonald shooting, and subsequent cover-up, has been widely publicized and is seen as the impetus for Alvarez’s electoral downfall, an investigation by The Daily Beast found that Alvarez failed to prosecute 68 police officers that killed civilians. Even more shocking is the fact that these decisions were seemingly made without any documentation explaining the decision to forego any prosecution.

In another controversial police shooting case, Alvarez charged an off-duty police officer with only involuntary manslaughter in the shooting death of Rekia Boyd, an unarmed 22 year-old black woman. Judge Dennis Porter cleared Chicago police detective Dante Servin of involuntary manslaughter, ruling that the shooting was intentional, so Porter couldn’t be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. Critics accused Alvarez of purposefully undercharging the detective, allowing him to go free after the tragic death of Boyd. Mayor Emanuel recommended that detective Servin be fired, but he somehow remains on the job. Chicago agreed to pay Boyd’s family $4.5 million as compensation for Rekia’s death.

Kim Foxx, who won the Cook County State’s Attorney job from Alvarez with over 60% of the vote, stated that her victory was about “turning the page” and that, “The need to rebuild a broken criminal justice system here in Cook County is not work that should be taken lightly.” From their statement following Foxx’s defeat of Alvarez, Assata’s Daughters made it clear that they will be watching, as will surely Black Lives Matters and other civil rights group demanding criminal justice reform in Chicago and across the nation.

The full statement released by Assata’s Daughters following the defeat of Alvarez:

State’s Attorney Anita Alverez Loses Re-Election After Tireless Campaigning from Chicago’s Black Youth

“Chicago Black youth have kicked Anita Alvarez out of office. Just a month ago, Anita Alvarez was winning in the polls. Communities who refuse to be killed, jailed, and abused without any chance at justice refused to allow her to be re-elected as State’s Attorney.

“We did this for Rekia…

“We did this for Laquan…

“We won’t stop until we’re free and Kim Foxx should know that as well.”

###

About Assata’s Daughters

Assata’s Daughters is an intergenerational collective of Black women and girls. This demographic represents both the largest growing prison population and those leading protests against state violence in Chicago.

For More information visit: http://assatasdaughters.org

For photos of today’s #ByeAnita banners visit: https://app.eyefi.com/s/29400487-2-uPFgBoR3PjI8Ucrr

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, a Hillary Clinton supporter, has become so toxic that he has had to stay away from the Democratic front-runner while Bernie Sanders has run anti-Emanuel ads tying Clinton and the embattled mayor together. Mayor Emanuel has come under fire particularly for the police shooting of Laquan McDonald and the closing of many public schools. Now, black Chicago activists are flying banners on Super Tuesday that state “Chicago Stands with Laquan, Hillary Stands with Rahm— #ByeAnita #ByeRahm” across the city’s skyline.

I want to thank Rahm Emanuel for not endorsing me. I don’t want the endorsement of a mayor shutting down schools and firing teachers.

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) March 12, 2016

Assata’s Daughters, an activist group consisting of black women in Chicago sponsored the flyover, on the day that Chicagoans will be casting influential votes in the Illinois primary that has seen Bernie Sanders drastically close the gap in Hillary Clinton’s birth-state. There has been much speculation as to whether Clinton’s ties to Emanuel would ultimately benefit the anti-establishment Sanders.

In a statement announcing the banner flyover, Tess Raser, an organizer for Assata’s Daughters demonstrated deep feelings of anger at Mayor Emanuel, Hillary Clinton and Illinois State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez. Tess Raser condemned Chicago’s mayor as “anti-black” and Clinton and Alvarez as complicit in his actions, stating, “To this day, Hillary Clinton has yet to condemn Chicago’s anti-black mayor. Mayor Emanuel has conspired with State’s Attorney Alvarez during his own re-election campaign to cover up the police murder of Laquan McDonald —a life that to Emmanuel, Alvarez, and Clinton did not matter.  Any politician who supports Emanuel should consider themselves implicated in his misconduct. Anti-black politicians are not welcome in Chicago whether they are running for State’s Attorney or President of The United States.”

Mayor Emanuel has seen his approval ratings plummet down to 27% as he has been accused of covering up a video showing Chicago police officer Jason Van Dyke shoot 17 year-old Laquan McDonald 16 times in 13 seconds. Video of the shooting was captured by a police cruiser’s dash cam, but wasn’t released for 13 months after the shooting.

The shooting of McDonald occurred just four months before a Mayor Emanuel faced reelection, where he ultimately defeated Jesus “Chuy” Garcia, who has appeared in a recent ad supporting the anti-establishment Bernie Sanders. Many feel that Mayor Emanuel’s reelection chances would have been harmed by the release of the video, so he decided to bury the video as much as possible.

Criminal justice reform has been a major political issue, in our society and during the Democratic presidential campaign. The shocking number of occurrences of police shootings has captured the nation’s attention and civil rights and civil liberties activists are demanding real change to address this serious issue.

After the polls close, it will be interesting to see how Hillary Clinton ultimately fares in the polls, particularly among Chicago’s black voters. Clinton has relied upon black support as one of the foundations of her candidacy, but that support has been tested by Senator Sanders and Chicago civil rights activists. Whether Chicago and Illinois residents #FeelTheBern, it is apparent that public support for Rahm Emanuel won’t return anytime soon.

“I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death,” Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun wrote in a 1994 dissent where he declared, “the death penalty experiment has failed.” More than 150 death row inmates have been exonerated by evidence of innocence since 1973. A recent study has examined exonerations and concluded that at least 4% of those sentenced to death are indeed innocent. No wonder that support for the death penalty has decreased among all political affiliations with 56% of Democrats now opposing the “machinery of death.”

I was so touched by Ricky Jackson who served 39 years for a murder that he didn’t commit as he asked Hillary Clinton about her position on the death penalty at the Democratic town hall in Florida last Sunday. Jackson’s story took my back to my college days in Columbia, Missouri. Inspired by the work of the Innocence Project, my wife and I joined other activists in publicizes the plight of Joseph Amrine, who was  eventually exonerated and released off of death row.

I was proud to have the University of Missouri’s ACLU and Christian Legal Society join forces on a clemency petition for Joe and to sit next to Joe’s attorney as his case was argued before the Missouri Supreme Court. The State of Missouri argued that Mr. Amrine should be executed even though no evidence remained to tie him to the murder after three witnesses recanted, admitting they had lied on the stand. Three Missouri Supreme Court judges still wanted to allow the state to execute Joe, but fortunately four agreed that a new trial was warranted. One of the highlights of my life remains the day that Sarah served Joe his first meal as a free man at Shakespeare’s Pizza in Columbia, Missouri.

Criminal justice issues have clearly been a big issue in the race for president, with a lot of time spent on the need to end our era mass incarceration. Capital punishment is another area of our criminal justice system that needs reform.

One Democratic candidate, Bernie Sanders, opposes the death penalty, while Hillary Clinton wants to keep the death penalty “in reserve.” While I don’t shed a tear for mass murderers, we can ensure that they serve life in prison without the possibility of parole, we don’t gain anything as a nation by executing them. By executing people, even those guilty of horrific terrorist attacks, our nation could actually lose out on the ability to gather more evidence that can be helpful. Not to mention the horrific consequence of executing innocent people.

The exonerated Ricky Jackson, who barely escaped the machinery of death, penned an oped for CNN stating, “Given this evidence, it is time that no candidate — Democrat or Republican — should be taken seriously if he or she supports capital punishment.”

At the Democratic town hall in South Carolina, when asked which Supreme Court Justice he admired, Bernie Sanders answered, “Thurgood Marshall was a damn good Supreme Court justice.” Thurgood Marshall was one of the great heroes of our time and what he wrote about the death penalty in 1972 rings just as true today:

At a time in our history when the streets of the Nation’s cities inspire fear and despair, rather than pride and hope, it is difficult to maintain objectivity and concern for our fellow citizens. But, the measure of a country’s greatness is its ability to retain compassion in time of crisis. No nation in the recorded history of man has a greater tradition of revering justice and fair treatment for all its citizens in times of turmoil, confusion, and tension than ours. This is a country which stands tallest in troubled times, a country that clings to fundamental principles, cherishes its constitutional heritage, and rejects simple solutions that compromise the values that lie at the roots of our democratic system.

Our criminal justice system is just too flawed, especially if you are poor, let alone a poor person of color, to give the state power over life and death. Democratic voters have an opportunity to elect a president who unequivocally opposes the death penalty or one that will continue to “tinker with the machinery of death.” I urge you to choose Bernie Sanders, don’t “tinker with the machinery of death.” Let’s stop the machine instead.

The most recent polls continue to show momentum for Bernie Sanders as Super Tuesday 2 approaches. Following the huge (YUGE) upset in the Michigan Primary, where Sanders was trailing Hillary Clinton by more than 20 points in most polls, Bernie appears within striking distance in Missouri, Ohio and Illinois, with a CBS/YouGov poll actually showing Sanders up 2% in Illinois, Hillary Clinton’s birth-state. While he still trails by over 20% in both North Carolina and Florida, there are signs that Sanders is closing the gap, just as he did in Michigan.

While the cannabis community has largely rallied behind Bernie Sanders’ campaign, thanks to his call to end cannabis prohibition and other criminal justice reforms, but the largest marijuana law reform PACs mostly saving their resources for state ballot measures. Without big donors, in the cannabis industry, or really any industry for that matter, Bernie Sanders relies upon small contributions to keep up with the large establishment financial backing enjoyed by Hillary Clinton.

My wife and I have pitched in more than we have for any candidate before and some local Portland cannabis entrepreneurs have found unique ways to support Sanders’ candidacy. As our Carl Wellstone experienced first-hand, Foster Buds dispensary is providing 10% of proceeds from pre-rolled joint sales to Sanders and apparently, business is good as cannabis consumers are flocking to the shop to #FeelTheBern. Ceramics artist Ariel Zimm has been widely successful selling pipes adorned with Bernie Sanders’ logo and sending 10% to his campaign. Zimm has been so successful, that she has maxed out her $2,700 allowable personal donation to Sanders her Stonedware company has a backlog until June on the pipes.

Ending cannabis prohibition, as Sanders supporters, would greatly benefit the cannabis community and industry across the nation, in addition to being a better policy for the rest of the country. Illinois has a fledgling medical cannabis program while Ohio, Missouri and Florida hope to join the ranks of medical states this November. A Sanders presidency is still a possibility, and while it is, the cannabis community, drug law reformers and civil libertarians in general, should contribute as much as they can.

(Featured photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

The fact that Bernie Sanders is just 7% down from Hillary Clinton in Missouri’s Democratic primary this Tuesday has been widely reported. The Docking Institute of Public Affairs Poll conducted for Missouri newspapers has the Democratic establishment candidate Clinton with 47% of the vote with the anti-establishment Sanders at 40%, within the 8% margin of error, likely a positive sign based upon polling trends and the fact that Sanders won Michigan after trailing in the poll of polls by more than 20%. What hasn’t been widely publicized, if at all, is that Bernie Sanders bests Republican front-runner Donald Trump in a head-to-head matchup 43% to 40% while Trump beats Clinton 43% to 38%.

Granted, the Docking Institute’s poll numbers are within the margin of error and aren’t completely predictive as general election polls at this time of the primary season can be well off the mark. However, any objective political observer can agree that this primary season is unlike any in modern campaign history, otherwise we wouldn’t have a 74 year-old Jewish democratic socialist defeating the “inevitable” Democratic establishment front-runner in a number of important states. The Republican nominating process has obviously thrown conventional wisdom on its head as Donald Trump, a former New York City Democrat who once supported drug legalization, partial birth abortion and marriage equality (at least for Elton John) is the undisputed GOP front-runner without having to buy any TV ads or maintain many get-out-the-vote campaign operations.

Bernie Sanders often states that many polls show him the better candidate to defeat Donald Trump, a claim that Politifact calls “Mostly True.” While many pundits and Hillary Clinton supporters discount polls showing Bernie Sanders as the better Democratic candidate to defeat Donald Trump, there are trends during the campaign so far that back up what many polls, including this recent one in the Show-Me State, have been showing.

Look at the enthusiasm of the base of the support between Sanders and Clinton. Not only does Bernie attract large crowds, like his GOP counterpart Trump does, when Sanders has won states, there has usually been very large turnout, either overall or among young voters (the hardest voters to turn out). Many polls, particularly those in Michigan, didn’t capture the enthusiasm gap among the candidates.

Examine the independent vote, a voting bloc that has helped Trump on the GOP side. When independents can vote, such as in the New Hampshire and Michigan primaries, Sanders has bested Clinton greatly (about 70% to 30%) among these independent voters. Despite the statements from some Republicans that they won’t vote for Trump and some Democratic voters that say they won’t vote for their non-preferred candidate (this seems much more prevalent among Bernie supporters), it is reasonable to expect that party members will unite for the most part and that there will be a battle for the more than 40% of Americans that consider themselves independents.

Considering Donald Trump’s base of support, the “angry white man” voting bloc if you will, it seems obvious that Trump will run up large margins among white men, especially in blue-collar states like Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Missouri against Hillary Clinton. Trump will be able to tap into this working-class anger and demonize Clinton for her ties to Wall Street special interests and support of free trade policies that many of these voters feel have shipped their factory jobs overseas. Donald Trump won’t be able to use those attacks against Bernie Sanders, who defeated Clinton 62% to 37% among white men in Michigan.

Donald Trump’s rhetoric and policies will surely energize the Democratic base that consists of women and people of color, regardless of whether the Democratic candidate is Clinton or Sanders. However, among young people and independent white voters, who are fed up with politics as usual, there is simply too great of a chance that many of these voters will support Trump, sit out the election or vote third-party (or even write-in Bernie.) There are many reasons to support a presidential candidate, but if you are in a swing state like Missouri, Ohio, or Florida, and are considering electability as a primary reason to choose your Democratic candidate, then polling and political trends are showing more and more that you should cast your vote for Bernie Sanders.

Of course, I #FeelTheBern, and we here at Marijuana Politics are pulling for Bernie Sanders in the Democratic nomination, the candidate who wants to repeal federal cannabis prohibition and put justice back in our criminal justice system.  Please donate to Bernie,  volunteer, phone bank, Facebank, share posts like this on social media, or basically anything you can to help the cause of the only mainstream candidate that wants to end the federal war on the cannabis community. You can check out our archive for posts on the civil liberties policies, including cannabis legalization and greater drug policies, about Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, John Kasich and Marco Rubio.  

Inspired by Bill Maher lighting up a joint during his Real Time and calling for the national legalization of marijuana, Washington, D.C., cannabis law reform activists have called for a cannabis smoke-out protest in front of the White House on April 2nd. Why 4/2 instead of 4/20 (as originally called for), you may ask? Well, organizers of the protest have deemed the Obama Administration a “zero” on cannabis law reform, so the protest has been rescheduled to 4/2.

The smoke-out protest has been criticized by some activists, notably Tom Angell, told US News: “I’m not sure how smoking marijuana in a public park where children and families are vacationing is supposed to encourage the president to do what we want him to do,” says Tom Angell, chairman of the group Marijuana Majority. “It will likely have the exact opposite effect, as demonstrated by the fact that even some of our strongest allies in Congress are distancing themselves from this stunt.”

I spoke with Adam Eidinger, leader of the Washington, D.C.’s legalization measure and of this protest about criticism from people within the movement, particularly Tom Angell.  Adam responded: “Tom is a good friend and I respect his opinion, but when we looked at polling that we did on Twitter and it was 9 to 1 in favor that we needed to do this. We have tried to be respectful, sending many letters to President Obama and he hasn’t responded to us.”

Eidinger made it clear that he is very frustrated with the lack of respect that President Obama, and the Democratic establishment in general, have shown the cannabis community, “We are Democrats that put legalization on the ballot. We would be happy to forgo public smoking if the President agrees to a ‘bud summit’ that brings in cannabis law reform advocates like myself, Tom Angell, Rob Kampia, Ethan Nadelmann and Steph Sherer,” Adam continued. “We won’t be ignored anymore. I’m not the biggest advocate of public use, but for now, this is a tactic that we need because we have been ignored too long. Frankly, we don’t have anything to lose. President Obama should reschedule immediately to Schedule 3 at the worst and immediately pardon all marijuana growers. All of a sudden Democrats have discovered states’ rights on cannabis laws, but that isn’t good enough, we need legalization across the nation.”

I followed up with Tom Angell over Facebook about this planned protest and he had this to add: “I really respect the work Adam and others did to get legalization on the ballot and deliver a strong margin of victory on election day a few years ago. He’s a crafty and dedicated activist, but in this case I fear he might be letting his own pride about being a marijuana consumer get in the way of smart political organizing.”

Tom further stated: “While there’s certainly a role for civil disobedience in social justice movements, you usually protest by committing acts that you think should be legal but aren’t. Allowing the smoking of marijuana in public parks would not be good public policy.”

Normally, I would side with my colleague Tom Angell over my friend Adam Eidinger on a protest like this. Protests such as this can make participants feel good, but can end up counter-productive as it is hard to control large crowds and the media tends to sensationalize the most radical participants.  However, after talking to Adam, he may have convinced me that such an action is needed at this time. Eidinger is right to be frustrated and I share his frustration that cannabis legalization, a position favored by a majority of Americans and a supermajority of Democrats, isn’t given the respect it deserves. I hope that this event goes well and it spurs positive action from the Obama Administration.

Below is the press release sent out by rally supporters followed by the most recent letter that Adam Eidinger has sent to President Obama:

***MEDIA ADVISORY** 

White House Rally in Lafayette Square on Saturday, April 2 in Washington, DC Calls for theRescheduling of Cannabis Now

On Saturday, April 2 at 2:00 p.m. in Washington, DC at Lafayette Square located directly north of the White House, leaders, activists, advocacy groups and citizens will gather to demand that President Obama use his authority to reschedule cannabis—now. Why on 4/2?  The Obama Administration has been a big zero on cannabis reform,  so we are “rescheduling” from 420 to 4/2..

Who: Speakers from DCMJ and other cannabis advocacy groups, along with industry activists, civil leaders and citizens.

What: Emergency Mobilization to Reschedule Cannabis Rally

When: Saturday, April 2 at 2:00 p.m.
**Note: At 4:20 p.m. there will be a mass-consumption of cannabis.

Where: Lafayette Square located directly north of the White House on H Street between 15th and 17th Streets, Washington, DC.

What you can do:

•Click “Going” and invite your friends on DCMJ Facebook page

•Tweet with the hashtag #Reschedule420

•Call National Cannabis Advocacy Organizations to endorse #Reschedule420

•Forward info to your friends

•Volunteer with DCMJ on 4/2 to help things run smoothly

###

The White House                                                                                             March 8, 2016
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC

Dear President Obama,

This is our 3^rd letter to you in the last two years concerning cannabis reform. DCMJ previously wrote you before Ballot Initiative 71 was voted on in the District of Columbia and after the initiative passed with over 70% of the vote. Unfortunately, we haven’t received a reply from our previous letters. This lack of correspondence is why we are writing you today.

Next month DCMJ is rescheduling the international cannabis day of celebration, April 20 to Saturday, April 2, and making it a protest of your inaction on cannabis reform.   We are rescheduling the date to urge you to use your power as the president to reschedule cannabis. As a former cannabis (and current?) user, you know firsthand that cannabis does not belong in the Controlled Substances Act. While thousands of Americans die each each year due to dangerous drugs like heroin, the placement of cannabis in the same category makes a mockery of the Controlled Substances Act and breeds distrust in our law enforcement and our government .

I anticipate hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans will join us at 4:20pm for mass-consumption of cannabis on Pennsylvania Ave. as form of civil disobedience. However, I am willing to call off the mass-consumption of cannabis if you agree to a Bud Summit, where leaders of the cannabis reform movement are invited to the White House to discuss steps you can take to end the failed War on Drugs you inherited as president.

As American citizens of the District of Columbia, we do not have Senators or Representatives to advocate for us in Congress. Thanks to the 23^rd amendment to the Constitution, we only have you to speak for us. I am tired of waiting for Congress to reschedule cannabis. They would rather continue the failed War on Drugs instead of actually fixing the problems facing America. DCMJ respectfully urges you to call out their failed leadership and fix a genuine problem that you have the power to fix.   No more lives need to be ruined with unethical imprisonment for cannabis-related crimes if you act now.

Sincerest Regards,

 

 

Adam Eidinger

The Maine Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol has announced today that a lawsuit has been filed urging the state to recognize the intent of voters who want an opportunity to have their say on ending cannabis prohibition this November. As we previously noted, the Maine Secretary of State decided to trample the will and intent of thousands of voters by unnecessarily disqualifying thousands of signatures, without doing any due diligence to ascertain that signatures were filed directly.

It certainly seems that the Maine Secretary of State may have acted with prejudice either against the CRMLA campaign or against the individual notary that had thousands of signatures disqualified. It has been reported that Secretary Matt Dunlap’s office contacted notaries and followed up on perceived irregularities to ensure that voter intent was acknowledged.

Secretary Dunlap had admitted that more than 17,000 signatures were disqualified without his office doing anything to follow-up on the issue, after first erroneously stating that his office did attempt to contact the notary. While it is commendable that Secretary Dunlap has acknowledged that he is at fault for creating confusion and that he is mad at himself, it is more important that the will and intent of voters be recognized.

The lawsuit argues that the the Secretary of State’s decision to invalidate signatures was flawed because the disputed signatures match those on file with the state and that the Secretary of State acted outside of his authority in invalidating the petitions. Attorney Scott Anderson, of the Portland law firm Verrill Dana, is representing a group of Maine voters who signed the petition in support of the initiative, including CRMLA director David Boyer, Maine State Senator Eric Brakey, and Maine State Representative Diane Russell.

“We are confident that this appeal will result in the initiative appearing on the November ballot,” Boyer stated in a press release announcing the lawsuit. “Each of the petitions in question was properly signed by both the circulators and the notaries. There is simply no reason for the Secretary of State to reject more than 17,000 signatures from registered voters in the state.

“The Secretary of State’s Office did not follow procedures commonly used to ensure, in their words, the ‘integrity’ of the process,” Boyer added. “The law dictates that these 17,000-plus signatures be counted.”

A strong majority of Maine citizens support putting an end to the failed and harmful policy of cannabis prohibition. Hopefully, Maine courts will correct this temporary injustice and voters can have their say at the ballot box this November.

Cannabis law reforms, particularly medical marijuana measures, have had great success across the nation. We’ve had four states and our nation’s capital legalize cannabis for all adults while 23 states have legalized medicinal use. However, our success has been lagging in Middle America, our nation’s Heartland, but we can change that by legalizing medical marijuana in Missouri this November.

Missouri, the state of my birth, has a special place in my heart and is where I got my start in activism, helping legalize personal amounts of medical cannabis and decriminalizing personal use in Columbia, Missouri, all the way back in 2004. Some of the great folks that led that effort are still in Missouri making progress that includes decriminalizing small amounts in St. Louis and freeing Jeff Mizanskey from prison. They have also helped Missouri pass baby step medical legislation, but now are well on their way to passing a great medical law, but they need help.

Below is a fundraising request from Amber Langston, a longtime advocate that inspired me to get involved in the cause over 15 years ago, and one of the major reasons that marijuana law reform has made any progress in the Show-Me State. Medical marijuana has polled very well in Missouri and if Show-Me Cannabis and New Approach Missouri are successful, the victory will have positive repercussions, particularly in more conservative states that have yet to pass medical cannabis legislation. It is one thing for politicians and voters in states such as Arkansas and Louisiana to see that Oregon, California or New York have medical programs, but Missouri will really shake things up. Please consider donating to New Approach Missouri’s effort and let’s continue our momentum state-by-state.

Show Me the Money!

Dear Cannabis Community,

In November 2016, Missouri has the opportunity to become the second largest medical cannabis market in the country and to give our patient population much-needed access to their life-saving medicine. New Approach Missouri – a campaign committee which is an outgrowth of the 501(c)4 organization Show-Me Cannabis – is currently collecting the 165,000+ valid signatures needed for a robust constitutional amendment initiative petition which would allow for home cultivation and mandate dispensary licensing throughout the state.

On the plus side, the language has been written by and for the people of Missouri. On the downside, the effort doesn’t favor any particular millionaires, so there’s no one specific entity or interest to bankroll the process. We rely on everyday people to donate $35, $50, $100, $500 or $1000.

We have done a tremendous job bringing together a coalition and raising money from in-state supporters. Polling shows support at 70% on the proposed measure according to political news source Missouri Scout.

But if we don’t raise another $500k in the next few weeks, Missouri and its patients are out of luck, and probably for a couple of years.

Missouri represents the middle of the middle of the United States and is considered a political bellwether by many. Indeed, my choice to move back home to fight this fight was largely influenced by my experiences abroad when I was working on international drug policy for Students for Sensible Drug Policy. I saw firsthand how policies around the world would only change when the United States changed. So I went straight back to my roots. I left California and moved back home to the Show-Me State.

I could make a lot of money if I left Missouri to work in Colorado or Oregon or California. But I need to get this done first, and I need your help to do it.

Will you please take this opportunity and help me meet my personal goal of raising $50,000 for New Approach Missouri by April 1st?

Thank you for helping patients in Missouri and for helping patients around the world. We can only get this done together – and that means you!

In solidarity,

Amber Iris Langston

Deputy Director, Show-Me Cannabis

Elizabeth Warren’s call for the study of marijuana as a possible solution to alleviating our nation’s opioid epidemic garnered quite a bit of press as the respected progressive generates headlines for just about every policy position she takes, she even makes news when she doesn’t take a position. It caught my eye that a Roseburg, Oregon, Psychiatrist penned a Huffington Post oped supporting Warren as I’m afraid that too many Oregon patients will lose their access to medical cannabis due to recent regulations. Since most medical marijuana patients suffer from severe pain, I’m worried that we will see an increase in cases of opioid addiction, complications and deaths.

Dr. Scott Mendelson, wrote in The Huffington Post:

In the context of the epidemic of deaths by opiate overdose, an important study was published in 2014 in The Archives of Internal Medicine. It was found that in states in which marijuana has been made legal for medical purposes, including the treatment of pain, the numbers of deaths by overdose of opioid pain medications have dropped dramatically. They saw 24.8% lower mean annual opioid overdose mortality rates compared with states without medical marijuana allowances.

Some have dismissed that study as being merely statistical, and that it did not reveal what happened to specific individuals nor suggest any mechanism by which the access to and use of marijuana could have generated such effects. However, a new study by Dr. Simon Haroutounian of the Washington University School of Medicine, supports and helps explain the results of that study. In this study, individuals with severe, treatment resistant pain were allowed to supplement their only partially effective opiate pain medications with marijuana. The results showed the expected, modest additional pain relief with the marijuana. However, perhaps the most significant result was that by the end of the study 44% of the subjects had, on their own, stopped using opiates altogether, and many of those that continued the pain medications had reduced their intake. This would explain how the numbers of deaths by overdose of opiates is so greatly reduced in states that allow medical marijuana use.

No medication is harmless or without risk of side effects. However, to the best of my knowledge there are no reports in the literature of lethal or life-threatening effects of marijuana. In fact, as a psychiatrist who regularly prescribes medications such as lithium, clozapine, tricyclic antidepressants, and monoamine oxidase inhibitors, all of which can have lethal effects if not managed properly, I find it ironic that the relatively minor side effects of marijuana have aroused such great concern among those opposed to greater utilization of marijuana. Thus, I wish to support Senator Warren’s encouragement of the scientific community to pursue marijuana as treatment for pain and as a means to reduce the tragic increases in deaths by opiate overdose.

When we wrote the Measure 91 legalization measure, for which I was honored to serve as chief petitioner, we included language noting that the new law wouldn’t change the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act (OMMA). While M91 didn’t impact the OMMA, new legislation passed by the Oregon Legislature added new rules and regulations, making it difficult, if not impossible, for some existing medical growers to supply medicine to all of the patients they have been supplying over the years.

Now that it is legal for growers, retailers, wholesalers and processors to engage in commerce, the state has taken steps to impose rules and regulations to ensure public safety and discourage illicit activity. Many of these regulations are necessary and reasonable to follow the federal Cole Memo and protect the best interests of the state. There have been some bad apples who have abused the OMMA, as well as subsequent bad press, and it was only a matter of time before state officials clamped down on completely unregulated marijuana farms.

Some well-meaning laws sometimes have unfortunate, unintentional consequences. The need for regulation needs to be balanced against the health needs of sick and disabled patients and continually monitored. Patients battling poverty don’t have the means to hire high-priced lobbyists, so concerned citizens must remain vigilant.

If farmers are subjected to sensible regulations that track cannabis from seed (or clone) to sale (or donation), then why should compassionate farmers be forbidden from cultivating 96 (or 192) plants for 16 (or 32) patients on land that is zoned properly and neighbors don’t mind? Unfortunately, new rules will limit some medical grows to just 48 plants, limiting how many patients that can be assisted.

Medical marijuana might be a viable alternative to opioids for pain treatment, but truthfully, there’s a lot we just don’t know.

— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) February 25, 2016

Hopefully, the state will take further steps in future legislative sessions to both allow compassionate farmers to assist patients and establish a fund to assist low-income medical cannabis patients, just as the government does for prescription drugs and food assistance programs. As Elizabeth Warren has advocated, medical cannabis may be a positive tool to help decrease the harmful consequences of opioid abuse. If you are a patient or grower, who wants to share your story (including off-the-record about the difficulty that new rules and regulations have caused you, please email me at anthony@marijuanapolitics.com.

When my “Oregon Marijuana” Google Alert notified me yesterday that the Foster Buds dispensary and a local marijuana cultivator, Farmer 12, were joining forces to donate a portion of their revenue to support Bernie Sanders’ campaign, I had to do my civic duty and head over to the store and make a purchase. I was pleased to see that the shop had quite a few customers and pleasantly surprised to learn that the local business was absorbing the current 25% state tax imposed upon non-medical customers.

Mic first covered the “burn one for Bernie” offer:

“He is just the biggest advocate for the marijuana industry right now,” Ken Martin, the manager of Foster Buds, told Mic, speaking about the business’ decision to support Sanders.

A Farmer 12 Cone, which contains a gram of marijuana, costs $10 each, according to Foster Buds’ website. Martin told Mic that Foster Buds typically sells “a couple hundred a day” but that, since announcing the plan to donate to the Sanders campaign, “we’re selling a lot more now,” and that customers are coming in specifically “to support Bernie.”

“Cannabis enthusiasts, supporters and medical patients come from every walk of life now, and we all deserve a president who will rally to reschedule cannabis and transform America’s cannabis policies,” the business announced on social media on Tuesday. “We believe Bernie Sanders is the best and most likely candidate to appropriately represent the needs of our community.”

Anyone paying any attention to Marijuana Politics knows that much love has been given to Bernie Sanders, particularly for his call to end federal cannabis prohibition and reform our criminal justice system (put “justice back in our criminal justice system” as Sanders has stated.) Even the more libertarian-minded folks here, that are not in line with all of the democratic socialist utopian ideals of the Vermont Senator, understand that he is best on cannabis policy, and in our era of divided government, he would likely be great on civil liberties in general.

As a Bernie Sanders supporter and lover of cannabis, I really can’t think of a more enjoyable way to participate in politics than buying high-grade cannabis that is tested for mold, mildew and pesticides in a completely legal environment. Additionally, every purchase made at Foster Buds not only helps a local Oregon business that is helping Bernie Sanders, but it helps other states follow suit. Soon, Oregon will start making tax revenue public and those that revenue will add to the millions already collected in Colorado and Washington, enticing both voters and public officials to replace the failed policy of prohibition with the better policy of regulation.

Ken Martin was very friendly to me and the entire staff was knowledgable. I asked Mr. Martin if a lot of people were still coming in, and like me, mentioning that they want to support Bernie, and he answered, “Tons. Business has been continually booming.”

I also commended Foster Buds for taking care of the tax for their customers and Ken commented that, “We are happy to give back to the cannabis community.”

If getting fantastic cannabis and supporting Bernie wasn’t enough for you, Farmer 12 is also giving away a t-shirt and medical cardholders even get a medicated lollipop thrown in (I chose grape.) If you aren’t a medical cardholder and think that you want to save that 25% tax by buying on the non-regulated market, Foster Buds covers the tax for you.

Polling in Oregon has been sparse, but anecdotally and based upon demographics, Oregon should be Bernie country when the May 17th primary comes around. Oregon has a closed primary, so you must remember to register as a Democrat, which you can do online, by April 26th if you want to cast your ballot for Bernie. In the meantime, if you are over the age of 21 and are ever in the Portland, Oregon, area, head over to see the great folks over at Foster Buds and #FeelTheBern.

While Bernie Sanders and Ted Cruz/Marco Rubio were able to keep hope alive after Super Tuesday, the odds of a Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton general election matchup definitely increased. I, and many other progressive cannabis law reformers and civil libertarians, have spent a lot of time describing why Bernie Sanders is a better freedom candidate than Hillary Clinton, the time has come to sound some warning alarms about Donald Trump.

I asked my friend and colleague John Payne, Executive Director of Show-Me Cannabis, about the possibility of a Trump presidency and what it would mean for cannabis law reformers and civil libertarians. The libertarian-minded activist, responded, on behalf of himself and not for SMC: “It’s true that Trump has said some good things about medical cannabis, but he’s also changed his mind on nearly every issue he’s been asked about on the campaign trail. I don’t think we have any reason to trust his position on the issue. Furthermore, his promise to ‘open up’ libel laws would pose a grave threat to freedom of speech and quickly be used people with dissenting political views, such as cannabis law reformers.”

I know that some civil libertarians, even some here at Marijuana Politics, have serious issues with Hillary Clinton and have felt that Donald Trump’s history has pointed to signs that he may be a better civil libertarian, particularly on drug policy, than Clinton. Some even point to the likelihood that Trump will abandon some of his racially-charged and xenophobic rhetoric when he pivots toward the center during the general election, as candidates do after they win the primary. However, the way Trump has run his campaign, the zealotry of his followers, a few of his policy proposals and his cozying up to Chris Christie, raise serious concerns for freedom under a Trump presidency.

On the surface, Donald Trump’s marijuana policy isn’t much different than Hillary Clinton. Both of the front-runners have shown support for medical marijuana and maintain a states’ rights position for states that have legalized all adult use. While former Secretary of State Clinton has begrudgingly moved more progressive on cannabis, prodded by Democratic-leaning voters, GOP front-runner Trump has moved in the opposite direction, as he once advocated for the legalization of all drugs in the early 1990s.

While some Drug War reformers may hold out hope that Trump would revert back to his more libertarian ways on drug policy, his endorsement by Chris Christie should give pause to that idea. Governor Christie, who we have playfully deemed the Cannabis Cartman here at Marijuana Politics, has called marijuana users diseased and that the cure would be more law enforcement.

If Trump were to be elected president, Christie would surely be on the shortlist of attorney general nominees. Even if Trump were to continue to publicly support medical marijuana and states’ rights to their own cannabis laws, he would be unlikely to halt an Attorney General Chris Christie (I shuddered as I typed that) from prosecuting people for marijuana as presidents usually have bigger fish to fry than meddling in marijuana prosecutions, especially when those prosecutions will mostly be occurring in states that didn’t vote for Trump.

We have also seen Donald Trump gleefully have protesters forcefully escorted from his rallies, stating that they should be thrown out in the cold after his guards “confiscate their coats.” The Republican front-runner has even stated that he wished to commit violence upon a protester himself, he longs for the “good old days” when police acted quicker to rip protesters out of their seats and his crowds have gotten rather disgusting. Throw in the fact that Donald Trump advocates for eminent domain policies and opening up libel laws so he can go after media that criticizes him, we can see that he isn’t very libertarian when it comes to waging executive power domestically. Also, Trump has pledged to “bomb the shit out” of ISIS and any escalation of war usually creates a  nationalistic fervor that makes it more unacceptable to criticize the government and curtails civil liberties.

As Bill Clinton’s former Labor Secretary Robert Reich stated, Hillary Clinton didn’t sew up the nomination on Super Tuesday, and I, and many other civil libertarians will continue to tout Bernie Sanders candidacy until the fat lady has sung, that doesn’t mean that we are so vehemently opposed to Clinton that we would welcome a Trump presidency. In our age of perpetual war and continual surveillance, it is imperative that everyone concerned about freedom and liberty remain vigilant against authoritarian tendencies of our elected officials; the very fate of our republic may depend upon it. As it looks very likely that Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee, we’ll certainly be keeping tabs on how authoritarianism is seeping into our political system and the dangers it imposes.

Featured photo credit: DonkeyHotey via Flickr

Robert Reich Bill Clinton’s Labor Secretary made political waves by endorsing Bernie Sanders last week, despite deep ties with the Clinton family, which even includes a date with the future Democratic front-runner during college. Professor Reich, who taught economics for Harvard before moving onto the University of California, Berkeley, has long been a progressive economic icon, including the fact that he threw his support behind cannabis legalization, first publicly announcing his support for ending marijuana prohibition on Reddit. Reich took to social media to inform people that the race will not be over after Super Tuesday.

The conventional wisdom is that Hillary Clinton will get a near sweep today on Super Tuesday, carried by the large number of southern states with a large number of African-American voters, a similar voting demographic that gave her a resounding victory last Saturday in South Carolina. The anti-establishment Sanders will carry his home state of Vermont, but most pundits are questioning his ability to win many more Super Tuesday states, while Sanders expects to do very well in Minnesota, Colorado, Massachusetts and Oklahoma.

The Super Tuesday polls and prognostications are about to be moot as the votes get counted. Former Labor Secretary Reich posted on Facebook today that the Democratic primary will be far from over, calling statements that Clinton has clinched the nomination as “Baloney.” Professor Reich touts the more favorable electoral map, Bernie’s army of small donors and Sanders’ dedication to taking his movement all the way to the Democratic National Convention to as reasons why the race will be far from over, despite what happens on Super Tuesday.

So, don’t take my word for it, listen to Robert Reich. If you want to support the candidate that has called for an end to cannabis prohibition, and to bring justice back to the criminal justice system, and live in a Super Tuesday state, get out and vote. Regardless of where you live, continue to volunteer and donate for the only presidential candidate that has filed a bill to end the failed and harmful policy of marijuana prohibition.