I don’t think he’s a cranky old man on this. I think it’s about suppressing the black/minority vote. Drug laws are infamously easy to apply unequally. One in ten voters in Florida can’t vote. Minorities and the poor are tremendously over-represented.
It had a certain “feel good” value for the people trying to run businesses. There’s no way to know for sure, but it is very unlikely it ever affected any plans for prosecuting Federal Marijuana crimes against U.S. citizens in the least. The DEA has faced an ongoing challenge effectively going after the big trans-national players south of the border for over 50 years. Saying they should not prioritize efforts against consumers and small businesses in this country is just ludicrous. But it was a nice gesture, nonetheless.
Conservative Leaning here (not cultural)
I support legalization of it, with the same tired argument, it has great medicinal use and is much safer than alcohol.
None of the federal government’s business to suggest what people can and cannot ingest, though. Going after those who use it and small time “offenders” instead of going after the big fish (cartels, gangs, violence) associated with it, is counterproductive.
I don’t drink, nor use weed (not for years) anyhow, but because I don’t, doesn’t mean others wouldn’t want to or in the case of medicinal use, need to.
But in terms of business decisions uncertainty is a huge deal. The difference between the “The DEA probably won’t confiscate your business and haul you off to prison for the next 20 years” and the “The DEA won’t confiscate your business and haul you off to prison for the next 20 years” is a chasm when you are deciding where to invest your money.
Pissing off the citizens of a state that (along with 3 million illegal votes) prevented his winning the popular vote and is sitting as a big blue blob in his lovely red electoral map, might be enough of an upside for the Trumpster.
Note that the DEA wouldn’t have to prosecute every Jaun, Jason or Jamal they find with a joint. All they have to do is to pick one dispensary owner, take his house his car all his money and everything he owns through asset forfeiture laws,and then threaten him with decades in prison, with the message to other owners that they could be next. How many are just going to close up shop just so they can sleep at night?
Except that is not true, and that is not what the memo said. It changed no law and provided no real protection. It was only lip service, from an administration too impotent to actually “do” anything about it.
But what about JOBS…JOBS…JOBS? I bet there’s way more jobs in the legal pot industry than there are in the coal mining industry (and safer ones, too ). It’s the new conservative mantra, except MJ jobs don’t count because they are largely concentrated in blue states, I guess. But it’s also a surefire way to reduce south of the border MJ smuggling. And it’s a point on the scoreboard for states rights. And deregulation. And small businesses. And a way to make hippies shoulder more of the tax burden.
I really don’t know why conservatives are so down on legal pot. In addition to the above points they need to remember that pot smokers don’t make it to the voting booth as often as they’d like. Dude…is it Super-Wednesday yet?
The last part was a bad paraphrase of a Drew Carey bit.
"Total legal cannabis sales in North America hit $6.9 billion in 2016, with the US accounting for $6 billion. While significant, this number represents less than 13 percent of the total dollars spent on cannabis last year.
The ArcView Group has estimated that only 12.3 percent of the total money spent on cannabis in North America last year ($56 billion) went through the legal system. This means that we’re missing out on taxing more than $49 billion in cannabis transactions, which would translate into roughly $12 billion in new tax revenue.
“Cannabis is a major industry already, but most of the trade is happening in illicit channels that are not being taxed and are not being regulated yet,” Tom Adams, editor-in-chief of Arcview Market Research, said."
So hell, if we play a little conservative on what legal sales would be if it was legal nationwide, let’s call it a $40 billion industry. A 15% tax, which seems to be common, would raise $6 billion in annual taxes for states.
“The report estimates that legalization of adult-use, or recreational marijuana sales in California, which began on Tuesday, will create nearly 146,000 cannabis-related jobs in the state in four years.”
Yeah, that would be @ 1.25 MILLION JOBS in the industry if it was legal nationwide.
THAT is a major industry and a major league employer. Of all the companies in America, only Walmart employs more people than that. It’s as much as IBM, McDonalds and UPS combined.
So that leads to another question: How would you like a brand new industry in the USA that would, by itself, employ approximately 1% of American workers?
Why would you oppose such massive economic and employment opportunities?
Not trying to disagree with your post here, but I have a related question.
My understanding is that, since growing and selling weed is still illegal at the federal level, and you don’t get to make deductions on your taxes for illegal activities, they are paying taxes on their revenue, not their profits.
Should it be legalized, wouldn’t this lower the tax revenue received from the industry? (It would also serve to bring down prices, which would also potentially lower the sales tax received.)
It could. Legal pot prices have fallen. However, there tends to be a bottom being set in some places, as for example Canada. They’re looking at $10 a gram, which is $70 a quarter. Now you can find it cheaper already, but that is an extremely common price for a 1/4 ounce in Colorado, excepting the remote places with little competition or the tourist gouging places in some parts of Denver.
This is probably a GD trainwreck waiting to happen, but … It seems unlikely to me there is such a thing as an unnecessary fight between the federal government and the states. I’m probably wrong, but I’ve always thought the job of the federal government was to manage international stuff on behalf of the members of the union (or republic if you prefer). Junk like treaties, international trade agreements, defense of the nation’s lands and international interests, that sort of thing. Managing, or not, the daily life of the citizens, on the other hand, is a state thing. Again, I’m willing to accept I am wrong, given the amount of accepted federal influence on the daily life of the average citizen.
I just posted this in the SRIotD thread: From the “WTF were you thinking” file:
Video here, in case you doubt.
This is a really good video that discusses the history and is very entertaining.
That’s Mr. Mackey, Mmmmkay.
My reliable sources tell me that has been the going NYC rate for illegal weed for a long time now. Standard grade. Premium grade goes for double. So I’ve been told.
What happened to small government, getting government out of our private lives, and states rights?
I know the answer, it only applies when it allows them to steal our money or to fuck with people and do bigoted shit.
This is all Sessions doing. He has an obsessive hatred of marijuana due to this experience he had in the 60s.
No, yak, I ain’t that good. 
But I have begun referring to Trump as the Strawberry Nightmare.
To be honest, both sides argue states rights and federal oversight as it suits whoever’s ox is getting gored at the moment.