• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bernie Sanders introduces legislation to end federal ban on marijuana

Risky Thicket

Risky Thicket

Sewer Rat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
34,100
Reaction score
37,505
Location
With Yo Mama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This sounds like a logical approach at the federal level. How can anyone not connected to Big Pharma or Big Private Prisons object to it?

Vermont senator Bernie Sanders introduced legislation on Wednesday that would end the federal prohibition on marijuana, removing the drug from the federal government’s list of the “most dangerous” substances – a move that distinguishes the Democratic presidential hopeful from the other candidates in the race.

Under Sanders’ plan, marijuana would not automatically become legal. Rather, states would have the right to decide whether or not they want to legalize the drug – without fear of federal impediment. In effect, states would inherit the power to regulate marijuana in the same way state and local laws now govern the sale of alcohol and tobacco.
1. Source for the above quote.


2. Ending Marijuana Federal Prohibition Act of 2015.
Click to expand...
 
As much as I think Sanders is a fool, I support this.
 
Last edited:
"states would inherit the power"

That's ****ing classic, because last I checked, the power lied with the states from the start. That being said, I support this, but I still don't like Sanders, he's a ****ing nut.
 
this is the kind of attempt at real reform one rarely ever sees in the senate these days, much less during a presidential campaign

i highly doubt it passes cause only 4-5 states have legalized it, and the whole "tough on crime" scheming hasn't died off completely, but he deserves credit for trying

otoh when it fails, it will kind of expose the campaign promises as dependent on a broken senate
 
Objective Voice said:
Congress would be smart to pass this bill if for no other reason than to trump Mexico's recent decision to legalize marijuana for personal use.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/latin...duals-have-right-consume-and-cultivate-m.html

Otherwise, if you thought illegal drug trafficking of marijuana into the U.S. was a problem before wait until the profit margin for the Mexican drug cartels dry up domestically.
Click to expand...

It's legal in Colorado and the profit margins huge. Even the state has made a couple hundred mil since its inception.
 
chromium said:
this is the kind of attempt at real reform one rarely ever sees in the senate these days, much less during a presidential campaign

i highly doubt it passes cause only 4-5 states have legalized it, and the whole "tough on crime" scheming hasn't died off completely, but he deserves credit for trying

otoh when it fails, it will kind of expose the campaign promises as dependent on a broken senate
Click to expand...

I agree and was wondering myself on the logic to his timing.
 
Risky Thicket said:
This sounds like a logical approach at the federal level. How can anyone not connected to Big Pharma or Big Private Prisons object to it?

Vermont senator Bernie Sanders introduced legislation on Wednesday that would end the federal prohibition on marijuana, removing the drug from the federal government’s list of the “most dangerous” substances – a move that distinguishes the Democratic presidential hopeful from the other candidates in the race.

Under Sanders’ plan, marijuana would not automatically become legal. Rather, states would have the right to decide whether or not they want to legalize the drug – without fear of federal impediment. In effect, states would inherit the power to regulate marijuana in the same way state and local laws now govern the sale of alcohol and tobacco.
1. Source for the above quote.


2. Ending Marijuana Federal Prohibition Act of 2015.
Click to expand...

Good. It's about time.
Click to expand...
 
Montecresto said:
I agree and was wondering myself on the logic to his timing.
Click to expand...

might want some cred towards "making a difference/reforming washington" but it will backfire if the media follows it and it comes to a vote and fails

which if the repubs and his dem opponents were smart, they would see to that
 
Montecresto said:
It's legal in Colorado and the profit margins huge. Even the state has made a couple hundred mil since its inception.
Click to expand...

yeah but that can't continue once all 50 states legalize...can it?

right now the retirees are moving to colorado instead of florida, but once florida legalizes?
 
chromium said:
might want some cred towards "making a difference/reforming washington" but it will backfire if the media follows it and it comes to a vote and fails

which if the repubs and his dem opponents were smart, they would see to that
Click to expand...

Exactly, and it similarly failed big in Ohio this week! I kind of wish he hadn't now.
 
Canada's brand new prime minister has promised to legalize it. Hopefully, he will keep his word.
 
federal legalization is probably twenty years away at least, IMO.
 
chromium said:
yeah but that can't continue once all 50 states legalize...can it?

right now the retirees are moving to colorado instead of florida, but once florida legalizes?
Click to expand...

I don't know. There were big profits on alcohol during prohibition, but breweries are fat and sassy even as it's now legal in all 50 states.
 
Montecresto said:
I don't know. There were big profits on alcohol during prohibition, but breweries are fat and sassy even as it's now legal in all 50 states.
Click to expand...

yeah but i guess what irks me is that everything in america is about $

i'd like to legalize weed because it's the right thing to do and leave the bribes and lobbyists and such out of it. Let's rise above big pharma, for profit prisons and law enforcement on this
 
Helix said:
federal legalization is probably twenty years away at least, IMO.
Click to expand...

i doubt it since 4 years ago there were zero states and, while it didn't quite pass, ohio and michigan are hardly bastions of progressiveness

the gestapo tactics in the war on drugs have overstepped the line and it wouldn't surprise me at all if further outrages accelerate the legalization movement
 
chromium said:
yeah but i guess what irks me is that everything in america is about $

i'd like to legalize weed because it's the right thing to do and leave the bribes and lobbyists and such out of it. Let's rise above big pharma, for profit prisons and law enforcement on this
Click to expand...

You get no disagreement with me on that.
 
chromium said:
yeah but i guess what irks me is that everything in america is about $

i'd like to legalize weed because it's the right thing to do and leave the bribes and lobbyists and such out of it. Let's rise above big pharma, for profit prisons and law enforcement on this
Click to expand...

this is Federal politics we're talking about, it's just not possible
 
What is also interesting about Sanders' proposed legislation is that the media and conservatives are staying the heck away from discussing it. I'm not certain as to why. It would seem to me that people who advocate small government would support the legislation. Here again, at the political level it should be no secret that Big Pharma and Big Private Prisons likely own a hell of a lot of politicians, if not most. In essence politicians are being paid to be quiet.

One only needs to consider print and broadcast media to understand why the media isn't saying much. I'm too lazy to look up ad billing for Big Pharma, but we all know it is massive. It is difficult to watch a television program or read a newspaper without seeing drug advertising. In fact, I'd venture to say that commercial television would probably not be able to exist as a free to consumer medium if it weren't for car and drug companies' advertising dollars. You have to know that Big Pharma is leaning hard on print and broadcast media to influence favorable coverage or the amount of favorable coverage concerning medicinal marijuana or favorable and sensible legislative proposals.

Last thing. Hillary. It will be interesting to see where she might go regarding Sanders' proposed bill. Hillary's position at present is "wait and see". We have no idea what wait and see really means. Criteria? She hasn't offered any and likely has none. Time? Be serious. Maybe in her second term if it politically advantageous. Hillary's statement was/is nothing more than another facet of the Hillary facade. It is what you want it to be.

We all know that all things equal a brother is much more likely to get busted for simple possession than a white guy. It happens often. Fair? Just? You'd think Hillary would be supportive of a change in federal law that would help end the lopsided destruction of the futures of young non-white men and women.
 
Last edited:
chromium said:
i doubt it since 4 years ago there were zero states and, while it didn't quite pass, ohio and michigan are hardly bastions of progressiveness

the gestapo tactics in the war on drugs have overstepped the line and it wouldn't surprise me at all if further outrages accelerate the legalization movement
Click to expand...

If the next president decides to invade pot states, my guess is that there will be some outrage.
 
Don't normally say this, but I support Bernie on this one
 
chromium said:
i doubt it since 4 years ago there were zero states and, while it didn't quite pass, ohio and michigan are hardly bastions of progressiveness

the gestapo tactics in the war on drugs have overstepped the line and it wouldn't surprise me at all if further outrages accelerate the legalization movement
Click to expand...

I'd also point out that Ohio's proposal uniquely managed to annoy quite a lot of people irrespective of political leaning because it would establish a monopoly as a matter of state constitutional law. A LOT harder to undo if it doesn't turn out well and people don't like monopolies generally.
 
Risky Thicket said:
What is also interesting about Sanders' proposed legislation is that the media and conservatives are staying the heck away from discussing it. I'm not certain as to why. It would seem to me that people who advocate small government would support the legislation. Here again, at the political level it should be no secret that Big Pharma and Big Private Prisons likely own a hell of a lot of politicians, if not most. In essence politicians are being paid to be quiet.
Click to expand...

Not just conservatives. A whole lot of politicians have trouble talking about this because they have a "tough on crime" past. It used to get them votes. Now they've either got to 'evolve' or ignore what increasingly seems to be the will of the people.
 
rmexico said:
this is Federal politics we're talking about, it's just not possible
Click to expand...

well that's probably true, even the heavily scrutinized obamacare attempted a sweetener for nebraska. My objection is probably rooted in the contempt I hold for current drug enforcement. I'd like to see the DEA done in, at a minimum
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom