Hypercapnic Tom

Drug Prohibition: Still Stupid

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, jzk said:

We agree that the drug war is stupid.  But there is reasonable reasoning behind it.  Do we want a nation where 1/3 of the population are drug addicts like happened in China?  That is a reasonable concern.

I had not heard about that stat from China. Our own experience with "snake oil" that was mostly morphine didn't result in nearly that large a percentage.

After the Pure Food and Drug Act, that rate went down considerably because people learned they were ingesting morphine.

12 minutes ago, jzk said:

Do we legalize every drug?  No prescription drugs?  I say yes

I say eventually, but we should start with cannabis because it's the least dangerous and enforcement causes the most harm because it's so widespread and popular. After learning a few hard lessons about Laffers, as Cali is doing, we'll be better at decriminalization for the rest.

13 minutes ago, jzk said:

Why should I pay for damage done by a stupid drug war? 

We're paying to cause the harm, so why not pay to mitigate harm done on our behalf?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Repastinate Tom said:

I had not heard about that stat from China. Our own experience with "snake oil" that was mostly morphine didn't result in nearly that large a percentage.

After the Pure Food and Drug Act, that rate went down considerably because people learned they were ingesting morphine.

I say eventually, but we should start with cannabis because it's the least dangerous and enforcement causes the most harm because it's so widespread and popular. After learning a few hard lessons about Laffers, as Cali is doing, we'll be better at decriminalization for the rest.

We're paying to cause the harm, so why not pay to mitigate harm done on our behalf?

I would pay to end the drug war.  But you suggest keeping the drug war going on all sorts of other drugs.  There are trade offs.  Winners and losers no matter what you do.  We can't pay for everything all the time.  What if I wasn't able to be a doctor because of licensing requirements?  Who is going to pay me $400k per year?

Fixing bad government policies is about as much as we can hope for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, jzk said:

I would pay to end the drug war.  But you suggest keeping the drug war going on all sorts of other drugs.  There are trade offs.

Actually, I've suggested we go the Portuguese route on the other drugs. I suggest delaying that because we have this idiotic Duopoly tradition of Presidents appointing drug "czars" who say weed is as dangerous as heroin. We have state attorneys who find cannabis legalization laughable, or did until she started running for President. Baby steps are, to me, not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

21 hours ago, jzk said:

We can't pay for everything all the time.  What if I wasn't able to be a doctor because of licensing requirements?  Who is going to pay me $400k per year?

Fixing bad government policies is about as much as we can hope for.

You make some good points about what other stupid policies might require reparations.

From post 786:

Quote

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) plausibly worried that "concerns over how far to go on some of the restorative elements in our policy could divide our movement," with the result that "we don't get anything done." While Gaetz himself has nevertheless signed on as a cosponsor of the MORE Act, so far no other Republican in either house has joined him.

Hard to get the TeamD votes to end the war on weed without throwing some social engineering programs on top.

Just plain hard to get TeamR votes to end their sacred prohibition program, especially if you throw social engineering projects on top.

Rep. Gaetz seems to have decided some votes are better than none.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/15/2019 at 6:16 AM, Repastinate Tom said:

Meanwhile, in the 2nd Circuit, some Guido wants the DEA to explain themselves

And in the DC Circuit, the DEA has until August 28th to explain themselves

https://reason.com/2019/07/30/federal-court-demands-answers-from-dea-on-stonewalled-research-cannabis-applications/

Quote

The D.C. Circuit has instructed the DEA to respond to SRI's suit by August 28, 2019. The lawsuit is available here

Years after it should have happened, but better late than never.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2018 at 8:53 PM, Sean said:

High times!

EXCLUSIVE: De Blasio to tell NYPD to stop arresting New Yorkers for smoking pot in public

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/mayor-de-blasio-prepare-new-york-marijuana-legalization-article-1.4000084

Why Did New York Have to Decriminalize Marijuana Possession Twice?
 

Quote

 

Forty-two years ago, New York decriminalized marijuana possession. This week, as you may have heard, New York decriminalized marijuana possession again. What's up with that?

...

the new law eliminates the misdemeanor offense of possessing marijuana that is "burning or open to public view," a provision that police in New York City had commonly used to arrest people for something that supposedly was no longer a crime.

In addition to catching people who happened to be smoking pot or waving their weed around, cops could manufacture misdemeanors by instructing people they stopped to take out any contraband they might have or by searching them (ostensibly for weapons) and pulling out a joint or a bag. Voilà: The marijuana was now "open to public view," an arrestable offense.

Such tricks, combined with the NYPD's "stop and frisk" program, help explain why pot busts skyrocketed in New York City from 1997 through 2011, during the Giuliani and Bloomberg administrations, even while marijuana use (as measured by government-sponsored surveys) remained about the same.  During that period, according to figures compiled by Queens College sociologist Harry Levine, the number of low-level marijuana arrests averaged about 39,000 a year, 14 times the average for the previous 15 years. The arrests overwhelmingly involved blacks and Latinos, who accounted for 84 percent of the total in 2011.

 

More recently, Giulianio started working for the Trump administration and Bloomberg doubled down on his support for the wars on weed and guns and the stop and frisk tactic used in those wars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, frenchie said:
22 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

...

  1. End the war on drugs.

...

...

#5, I'm in total agreement with, and it's well past time we just did it.  Reform the entire incarceral system, while we're at it, strive for rehabilitation and restorative justice, instead of punishment.  But here, again... good luck with that.

What you guys are saying was confined to nutjob libertarians not so long ago.

We've really had pretty good luck, as now the entire TeamD Presidential field has adopted the nutty libertarian view when it comes to cannabis prohibition and there are even a pretty decent number of TeamR types on board.

Still not a topic of much interest, especially compared to gungrabbing, as a glance at this forum shows pretty much every day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaron Sandusky is still one of Obama's drug war prisoners.

https://reason.com/video/aaron-sandusky-has-spent-7-years-in-prison-for-selling-medical-marijuana/
 

Quote

 

Aaron Sandusky has spent nearly seven years in federal prison for conspiracy to distribute cannabis. He's one of about 20,000 federal or state inmates behind bars for an activity that is legal in one form or another in 33 U.S. states and Washington, D.C.

A bill is working its way through the Senate that might help people like Sandusky by expunging their records. Some advocates believe that President Donald Trump is close to granting clemency to some of these men and women―including Sandusky.

When Sandusky opened a marijuana dispensary in 2009, medical cannabis had been legal for 13 years in California. But in 2011, the feds carried out a series of federal raids on medical marijuana clinics in California, despite earlier assurances from President Barack Obama and his attorney general that they wouldn't target operators that were legal under state law.

 

I hope Trump actually UNDOES SOMETHING in this case but am not sure what, if any, basis there is for that hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reefer Madness Continues

https://nypost.com/2019/08/07/the-link-between-pot-and-mass-shootings-may-be-closer-than-we-think/
 

Quote

 

You can’t walk through the streets of Manhattan these days without smelling weed.

Even as evidence mounts of the health problems associated with marijuana, New York has insisted on joining other greedy states scrambling to legalize this deceptively dangerous drug.

It makes no sense at a time when American youth is suffering from an unprecedented mental health crisis.

And, in all honesty, we cannot rule out a connection between increasing marijuana use, mental illness and the recent spate of mass shootings by disturbed young males.

 

In all honesty, we had a violence problem in the alcohol industry about a century ago because of stupid prohibition laws and we have violence problems today because of stupid prohibition laws. The endless drive-by's that make up the bulk of "mass" shootings are drug war failures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shootout At Big Lots
 

Quote

 

on July 23, the parking lot was the scene of a botched a drug bust resulting in a shootout between the suspect and undercover agents. The suspect was killed and an undercover agent was shot. 

A witness described the scene as "chaos" with shoppers inside Big Lots reportedly barricading the door with a refrigerator in an effort to protect themselves from gunfire. A 34-year-old mother said her children were rushed inside the daycare building when shots rang out. Four-year-olds were ushered away from windows and huddled into corners as gunfire erupted outside. In the aftermath, frantic parents drove past a gray sedan and a gold SUV surrounded by crime scene tape, both vehicles with bullet holes through the windows.

Why did Pennsylvania's top law enforcement agency choose this spot for an armed confrontation with a low-level drug dealer?

"Look, this work is dangerous work and we don't get to dictate the terms of every location where we meet," Attorney General Josh Shapiro (D–Pa.) said dismissively in response to questions during a press conference

But that's simply not true. I know, because I was a major crimes detective for nearly a decade.

Parking lots are routinely chosen by police to conduct drug busts because it is easy to hide surveillance vehicles in a crowded parking lot. In training classes for undercover operations, instructors often recommend conducting drug buys in parking lots for this very reason. 

 

Just one of many ways that the stupid drug war endangers the lives and rights of citizens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Magic Mushroom Ballot Initiative In Oregon
 

Quote

 

The ballot measure would not allow mushrooms to be sold in stores. Instead, it would allow adults, age 21 and older, to visit official service centers on the recommendation of a medical professional in order to take psilocybin under the supervision of a licensed facilitator. Those centers would be overseen by the Oregon Health Authority.

"The facilitator kind of orients you to the service, asks some questions, gets to know you and your desires and your intentions and issues a bit more," Tom Eckert told Oregon Public Broadcasting. "Nobody's going to be taking psilocybin home with them to administer to themselves, which means that there will be none in public, no one driving," Eckert added.

 

Uh huh. Because prohibition is responsible drug control that really works, none of us has ever been able to find any cannabis in America. Or something.
 

Quote

 

Unlike Denver, Colorado, which decriminalized the use of hallucinogenic mushrooms in May but has not yet set up a system regulating such lawful use, the Oregon proposal aims to quickly set up a sanctioned system for imbibing the substance.

The Oregon proposal also stands out in another way. As Marijuana Moment has pointed out, the "Oregon measure is distinct in that it's the only one currently aiming to create a way for people to legally obtain the substance through a medical model."

"Psychedelics are uniquely powerful when it comes to creating lasting change in the human being," Eckert told Oregon Public Broadcasting. "It's a unique opportunity and it's been denied for all these years."

 

The medical benefits and risks are slowly starting to become apparent despite the stupid drug war. Accelerating the rate of learning and making new treatments available is a good idea in the medical area for psychedelics, as it is for cannabis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you sell a legal product and you use public roads to do it, you may have created a nuisance
 

Quote

 

Although the prototypical public nuisance involves using your property in a way that negatively affects your neighbors, Balkman argues that "there is nothing in this text that suggests an actionable nuisance requires the use of or a connection to real or personal property." Alternatively, he says, "in the event Oklahoma's nuisance law does require the use of property, the State has sufficiently shown that Defendants pervasively, systematically and substantially used real and personal property, private and public, as well as the public roads, buildings and land of the State of Oklahoma, to create this nuisance."

In other words, Johnson & Johnson's marketing practices required various uses of property in Oklahoma, so the bad consequences ascribed to them can reasonably be viewed as a public nuisance. The company's representatives traveled on "public roads" when they visited doctors, for example, so if they misled those doctors about the dangers of prescription opioids during those visits, that satisfies any requirement that a public nuisance involve a harmful use of property. Yet this understanding of public nuisances is broad enough to cover all manner of torts that are usually conceived as qualitatively different.

 

Looks like another in a long train of stupid drug war precedents that will appear in a gun thread near you before long.

As for whether people were really misled...
 

Quote

 

...

Ruling against Johnson & Johnson on Monday, Cleveland County District Court Judge Thad Balkman claimed the "current stage of the Opioid Crisis…still primarily involves prescription opioids." According to records collected by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), however, pain pills were involved in just 30 percent of opioid-related deaths in 2017. Most of those cases also involved other drugs, mainly heroin and illicit fentanyl or fentanyl analogs, which were implicated in three-quarters of opioid-related deaths.

Balkman likewise seems to have accepted at face value Oklahoma's assertion that "opioids are highly addictive." The evidence also contradicts that claim.

In 2015, according to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, about 2 percent of Americans who took prescription opioids, including nonmedical users, qualified for a diagnosis of "opioid use disorder," a broad category that is not limited to addiction. By comparison, about 9 percent of past-year drinkers had an "alcohol use disorder."

A 2018 BMJ analysis of medical records found evidence of "opioid misuse" in 1 percent of patients who took pain pills after surgery. While studies find that misuse is more common among chronic pain patients, a 2016 New England Journal of Medicine article concluded that "rates of carefully diagnosed addiction" average less than 8 percent.

That study, which was co-authored by Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, noted that "addiction occurs in only a small percentage of persons who are exposed to opioids—even among those with preexisting vulnerabilities." Yet Balkman deemed such statements by Johnson & Johnson "false, misleading, and deceptive."

The judge likewise faulted the company for suggesting that prescription analgesics pose a "low danger" when used for legitimate medical purposes. But according to a 2015 Pain Medicine study, the fatal overdose rate among North Carolina patients who received opioid prescriptions in 2010 was 0.02 percent.

Balkman also thought Johnson & Johnson was wrong to say opioids could be appropriate for treating chronic pain and wrong to suggest that undertreated patients might look like addicts as they desperately sought relief. Yet as South Central Judicial District Judge James Hill pointed out when he dismissed North Dakota's lawsuit against Purdue Pharma in May, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has endorsed both of those propositions.

Balkman views the very idea that pain is undertreated as suspect in light of the dramatic increase in opioid prescriptions since the 1990s. But inadequate pain treatment can and does coincide with widespread misuse, and the problem has been aggravated in recent years by ham-handed efforts to reduce prescriptions, as the FDA, the CDC, and the American Medical Association have recognized.

 

As noted in post 702 of this thread, the CDC's view that their guidelines were misinterpreted is a bit thin. The guidelines said doctors should avoid opiods or "carefully justify" disregarding that advice. So they left pain patients inadequately treated because that's the safe approach. Completely predictable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hawaii destroys hemp growers’ crops due to high THC levels

 

Quote

 

More than half of hemp crops cultivated in Hawaii in the past year were unusable due to high THC levels.

The Honolulu Star-Advertiser reported Monday that the crops cultivated for the state’s hemp industry tested above the federal limit for the chemical that causes people to become high.

The state Department of Agriculture says 18 crops were destroyed due to heightened tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC.

Officials granted waivers to four crops that tested slightly above the limit, allowing the plants to be used as hemp.

A cannabis plant is legally classified as hemp rather than marijuana if it contains 0.3% or less THC, which causes marijuana’s mind-altering effects.

 

I wondered how that "high" THC content compared to what people actually use to get high.

Quote

The primary problem with the current available cannabis in dispensaries in Colorado is that the THC content is not like it used to be. Prior to the 1990s it was less than 2%. In the 1990s it grew to 4%, and between 1995 and 2015 there has been a 212% increase in THC content in the marijuana flower. In 2017 the most popular strains found in dispensaries in Colorado had a range of THC content from 17–28% such as found in the popular strain named “Girl Scout Cookie.”2 Sadly these plants producing high levels of THC are incapable of producing much CBD, the protective component of the plant so these strains have minimal CBD. For example the Girl Scout Cookie strain has only 0.09–0.2% CBD.

Oh. So 0.3% would mean what we used to call "ditch weed" and, from my list of things I know but should not, it will only give you a smoke inhalation headache.

Although not useful to stoners, the half of Hawaii's crop that was destroyed was still hemp, an incredibly useful plant. Destroying it because some Puritans are afraid someone might get high must be heartbreaking and bankbreaking for the farmers who grew it and is, like the rest of the drug war, stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EEK A NOMIX Of Fentanyl
 

Quote

 

...Back in 1975, the psychonautical chemist Alexander Shulgin predicted that synthetic opioids like fentanyl, which was first formulated in 1960, would be introduced in the black market as substitutes for heroin, which is derived from poppies. "The term 'when' rather than 'if' heroin substitutes appear is used intentionally, for this transformation seems economically inevitable," he wrote. Yet while fentanyl has been implicated in several overdose clusters since the 1980s, it did not emerge as a major factor in drug-related deaths until 2014 or so.

...

"Why now?" Pardo and his co-authors ask. Their answer highlights changes in drug production and distribution that created the conditions for the fentanyl explosion: innovations in synthesis that have made the process less complicated; a sprawling, weakly regulated Chinese chemical industry that supplies most of the fentanyl consumed in the U.S.; cheap, high-volume international shipping that makes fentanyl easy to send and hard to detect; and online outlets that take advantage of privacy-shielding technologies such as TOR and Bitcoin to supply fentanyl directly to U.S. distributors and consumers. But none of these developments would have created the current situation without the economic incentives created by prohibition.

...

Pardo et al. emphasize that, by and large, opioid users are not clamoring for fentanyl, which makes their habits more dangerous by making potency harder to predict. Replacing heroin with fentanyl is instead a logical choice for suppliers dealing with government efforts to suppress the drug trade, since it makes drug production and distribution less conspicuous and more profitable....

 

When the drug war creates problems like this, the answer always seems to be more drug war crackdowns.

Quote

The report suggests several harm-reduction policies that have greater promise, including expanded "medication-assisted treatment" (MAT) with methadone and buprenorphine. More boldly, Pardo et al. say it might make sense to relax current restrictions on MAT, expand the opioid replacement options to include pharmaceutical heroin or hydromorphone, and legalize supervised drug consumption sites. They also suggest research aimed at providing consumers with drug-testing kits that can indicate the concentration as well as the presence of fentanyl. Although "we are not endorsing these options," they say, "it might be time to invent new approaches and be open to trying ideas that seemed too risky or too alien in the past."

Treating addicts instead of pursuing more drug war failures isn't risky or alien compared to those drug war failures, at least to some of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prohibition Makes Matters Worse. Still. Again. 

https://reason.com/2019/09/09/congressional-report-on-deaths-of-despair-highlights-the-hazards-of-drug-prohibition/
 

Quote

 

Given the importance of drinking patterns, it is not surprising that alcohol-related deaths rose during Prohibition. By making commerce in alcoholic beverages illegal, Prohibition drove a shift from beer and wine toward distilled spirits, which are easier to smuggle and conceal because they pack more doses into the same volume. Prohibition also made alcoholic beverages more dangerous, since black-market booze could contain dangerous contaminants, such as the methanol that was added to industrial ethanol under a government edict aimed at discouraging diversion. And Prohibition replaced a culture of moderate drinking with an all-or-nothing ethos that encouraged rapid consumption on the sly.

The story of drug prohibition is similar. The Joint Economic Committee report notes that drug-related deaths were already falling by the early 1900s, before Congress banned nonmedical use of opiates and cocaine in 1914. But "drug-related deaths have been rising at an accelerating rate since the late 1950s," notwithstanding the government's increasingly expansive and aggressive efforts to suppress the illegal drug trade. "The increase has been especially sharp over the past 20 years," the report notes. And while "the proliferation of opioid deaths was initially a result of oversupply and abuse of legal prescription narcotics," the report says, "the crisis…shifted toward illegal drugs—first heroin and then more lethal synthetic opioids like fentanyl"—after "policy changes restricted the supply and form of prescribed opioids."

The upward trend in opioid-related deaths not only continued but accelerated after the government succeeded in reducing opioid prescriptions, pushing nonmedical users toward black-market substitutes. It's not hard to see why: Legally produced opioids come in uniform, predictable doses, while illegal opioids vary widely in potency, making fatal mistakes more likely. The emergence of fentanyl and its analogs as heroin boosters and replacements has only magnified that hazard.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NORML is right twice and Joe is still trying to shed his drug war dinosaur skin.

More...
 

Quote

 

Former Vice President Joe Biden said during Thursday’s Democratic debate that marijuana offenses should be treated as misdemeanors—a position that puts him sorely out of step with every other presidential primary opponent on the debate stage, all of whom are calling for outright cannabis legalization.

“Nobody who got in prison for marijuana, for example—immediately upon being released, they shouldn’t be in there.” he said. “That should be a misdemeanor.”

“They should be out and their record should be expunged. Every single right should be returned,” he said. “When you finish your term in prison, you should be able to not only vote but have access to Pell grants, have access to be able to get housing, have the right to keep and bear arms, have access to be able to move along the way.”

 

OK, so maybe I edited his quote a little bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://reason.com/video/how-the-drug-war-destroyed-a-hippie-paradise-in-kathmandu/
 

Quote

 

...President Richard Nixon tried to nip communism in the bud by destroying a Himalayan hippie Shangri-La. But in stopping the smokers, he sparked a Maoist blowback.

...

But paradise is not of this earth. Two years after President Nixon declared an international "war on drugs," Vice President Spiro Agnew was dispatched to Asia. Agnew toured every country along the Hippie Trail before arriving in Nepal. Nixon threatened to withhold economic aid from countries that, in his view, held a permissive attitude toward the drug trade. Months later, Nepal enacted the first anti-drug laws in its ancient history.

Surrounded on all sides by India, China, and under mounting pressure from the United States, Nepal needed a strategy to cope with the Cold War. King Mahendra skillfully played the great powers against each other. He maintained cordial relations with all sides while extracting billions in development cash that would modernize the country, prop up the monarchy, and, for a few more generations, stave off revolution. In return, Nepal would play by international rules. And that meant the drugs and hippies had to go.

Kathmandu's hashish shops were closed. American narcotics agents roamed Freak Street, surveilling drug takers and draft dodgers for arrest on their arrival back in the United States. And in a move that would have consequences for decades to come, Nepal's marijuana fields were torched.

The hippies weren't the only ones angered by prohibition. In western Nepal, far from the capital city of Kathmandu, hashish cultivation was the main source of income. Sellers and growers were arrested. Private property with marijuana growing on it was forfeited to the state. Tens of thousands of farmers were pushed to the brink of starvation. Promised development aid to the region never materialized.

Seeing political opportunity in economic collapse, the Communist Party exploited local grievances and persuaded residents that only a violent overthrow of the government would solve their problems. The Maoists vowed to overthrow the monarchy and fly the hammer and sickle atop Mt. Everest. Nixon's global war on drugs was fueling the communist ideology it was trying to contain.

 

Unintended consequences from a stupid drug war. Gee, whodathunkit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ontario Govt Manages To Lose Money Dealing Weed

https://reason.com/2019/09/16/how-do-you-lose-money-dealing-marijuana-be-a-government-agency/

But they're handling things better than California

https://reason.com/2019/09/12/california-has-completely-crapped-the-bed-rolling-out-legal-marijuana/

And both are far better than Oklahoma

https://reason.com/2019/09/16/woman-sentenced-to-12-years-in-prison-for-selling-31-of-marijuana-lands-back-in-jail-for-court-fees/

The latter article contains a link to a far more detailed account of Spottedcrow's "crime."

https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/incarceration-takes-away-one-mother-s-life/article_e543aa04-db9e-56ea-a3c0-4bcfdb4dd3d4.html

Quote

When Spottedcrow was taken to jail after her sentencing, she had marijuana in her jacket.

Her story is another sad tale about how the stupid drug war ruins lives while making drugs more dangerous but that's just funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/18/2019 at 8:40 PM, d'ranger said:

Just wanted to add this is a topic that we agree on.

That's nice.

Congress Plans To Vote on Marijuana Banking Bill Next Week
 

Quote

 

The SAFE Banking Act—the acronym stands for "Secure and Fair Enforcement"—would let banks and other financial institutions do business with state-legal marijuana businesses without incurring the wrath of the federal government. The bill will get a floor vote in Congress next week.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D–Md.) and House Minority Whip Steve Scalese (R–La.) announced today that the legislation would be part of next week's House calendar. The bill was introduced in March by Rep. Ed Pearlmutter (D–Colo.) and cleared the House Finanical Services Committee with a bipartisan 45–15 vote later that same month. But since then the bill has been stalled, even though it has more than 150 cosponsors and has support from bank lobbyists and from attorneys general in 33 states.

Unless it gets derailed at the last minute, the bill appears to be the first federal marijuana legalization measure to reach the floor of either chamber of Congress.

 

It would make a lot more sense if the first measure were to reschedule or deschedule cannabis. I'm glad they're DOING SOMETHING about the ability of the cannabis industry to get financial services but suspect that banks will still be wary of doing business with people who are clearly committing a number of federal crimes.

Quote

As Reason's Ben McDonald highlighted earlier this year, any financial institution that does business with a pot shop could potential violate the federal Controlled Substances Act, USA PATRIOT Act, Bank Secrecy Act, and Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. That's insane.

Another thing that would be insane would be a banker subjecting his business to civil asset forfeiture by participating in violations of those laws.

Quote

A companion bill in the Senate, introduced by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D–Ore.), has 33 cosponsors. But that total includes only four Republicans, making passage through the upper chamber more of an open question.

The four from TeamR are Cory Gardner, Lisa Murkowski, Dan Sullivan, and Rand Paul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now