Three States to Vote on Marijuana Legalization: What Happens Then?

Colorado, Oregon and Washington are all rolling out ballot measures that could legalize the use of marijuana, be it for medical or recreational purposes. Rolling Stone writer Julian Brookes has written a cogent piece on what the likely consequences will be. Will wins in any of the states be enough of a tipping point to enable politicians to discuss federal legalization without committing career suicide? I wouldn’t count on it:

But don’t expect too much there. Last year, Reps. Barney Frank and Ron Paul introduced the first-ever federal legalization bill. It’s not going anywhere anytime soon; another Frank bill, the Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act, which would leave enforcement of medical pot to the states, has been kicking around the Hill since 1997, but has never made it to a vote. “Congress is several years behind the general public on this,” says Rep. Jared Polis, a Colorado Democrat and a co-sponsor of both bills. But even congress is starting to come around. When he first came to Washington, in 2009, there were only “a handful” of lawmakers prepared to stand up for more liberal drug laws, says Polis. Today, most Democrats are on board.

Read more at Rolling Stone.

12 Comments on "Three States to Vote on Marijuana Legalization: What Happens Then?"

  1. i don’t think you know what cogent means.

    • pertinent might have been a better choice
      but he used cogent to see if you were stoned

      • pertinent and cogent do not apply to the article in any way. the article author does not know what he is talking about.

        • in a post-information society
          it is unreasonable to expect
          the writer to be knowledgeable
          and even more unreasonable to expect
          something cogent or pertinent in the mass media
          especially if they put the word Disinfo
          right out front for anyone to see

          this article is specifically design
          to generate typing
          nothing more

        • When can we expect to see the accurate article on the subject, which you have authored?

          • the 9th and 10th amendment are clear. i determine my rights. i have the  right to intake a plant with no lethal dosage, and i have the right to do it as i see fit. Especially, when i do not harm others in the process. (don’t need a full article those 4 sentences do it.)

          • While I may agree with you (or maybe not), there are armed men with a penchant for violence who definitely do not.

            Do you have a plan to simply kill all of them preemptively or do you have a more fully developed argument which will certainly change their minds on the subject?

            Without either of the above, you’ll have to rely on State Legalization and hope for Federal forbearance until decriminalization can take place on National level.

          • if they want a court battle. I’m not hiding just currently out of pot. their penchant for violence is further proof of the incorrectness of their actions. the idea of placing hope on the actions of charlatans is laughable. our govts do not have the right to legislate my rights. the govt does not determine our rights. the constitution is the foundation, as a contract to facilitate our self determined rights. why would i rely on those that already violate that contract?

          • Plan A then.

            Good Luck.

          • But you’re hurting the “cultural cohesion”, and that just hurts the hearts of conservatives eeeverywhere.

  2. There’s no business like show business
    Like no business I know
    Everything about it is appealing
    Everything that traffic will allow
    Nowhere could you get that happy feeling
    When you are stealing that extra bow

  3. my buddy’s
    step-mother makes $83/hr on the computer. She has been unemployed for
    six months but last month her check was $17392 just working on the
    computer for a few hours. Here’s the site to read more

Comments are closed.