Not if it’s in the constitution. I would have voted against it too. I favor marijuana legalization, but due to the principle involved I do actually make the perfect the enemy of the good. I’m against medical marijuana too. Legalize it or don’t legalize it. Medical marijuana, overly regulated marijuana, and decriminalization are problematic. As a product that is less harmful than alcohol and possibly less harmful than cigarettes, it should face no more regulation than those products.
Nonsense. Utter nonsense.
I agree. Marijuana is going to be legal soon. At this point there’s no reason to fight for half measures. There are some situations where you should just take the whole loaf.
I voted for the Ohio ballot issue, but wasn’t surprised when it failed for the reasons stated above. Sooner or later pot will be legalized here, and quite possibly nationwide.
In fact, not only did the Ohio measure fail, it failed twice: Also on the ballot was a counter-amendment prohibiting amendments from creating state-sponsored monopolies, and it passed (albeit by a much smaller margin, 52-48). I’m actually a bit surprised: I expected both measures to pass (in which case the anti-monopoly one would have taken precedence, for the same net result).
Well, it can be made not illegal nationwide, but it can’t be made legal, as in states can’t be forced to tolerate it. I believe there are still some dry counties and cities too.
Medical is legal here in CT - for seriously limited number of conditions. I would be able to get medical marijuana in a number of states with the conditions I have, but not in CT … I am not willing to get cancer so I can relieve my other issues…:rolleyes:
Not sure why you felt the need for quotation marks there. The proposed system was not an “oligopoly”; it was an oligopoly.
Count me as another supporter of legalizing marijuana who is also glad that this measure failed in Ohio.
As a left-liberal, i firmly believe that the government often has a valuable role to play in the economy, and there are times when it is completely appropriate to interfere in the market in order to promote broader social and economic well-being. Sometimes regulation is appropriate; sometimes it is appropriate for the government to get directly involved in a particular industry through licensing or the provision of services.
But governments shouldn’t be handing over monopoly or oligopoly power to private corporations unless there is a compelling—i would go so far as to say overwhelming—public interest involved. I just don’t see any such compelling justification in the case of weed. By all means, make it subject to existing laws regarding health and safety standards, adulteration, labeling requirements, etc. But you can do that without handing the whole industry over to a cartel.
Does anyone know, by the way, what level of regulation or oversight this ballot measure would have allowed, in terms of pricing? After all, one of the key historical trade-offs, in the case of natural monopolies like utilities and railroads, is that the monopolies must submit to price regulation. So, my local power supplier can’t raise my rates until it justifies the increase in front of a Public Utilities Commission. Was there any such price protection in the Ohio ballot measure, or were the stoners just going to have to bend over and pay whatever the cartel decided was appropriate?
The amendment would have created a marijuana control commission that would have been tasked with overseeing retail says, but AFAIK there were no price controls built in. Retail prices would have been set by the dispensaries, the oligopoly would have set the wholesale price at whatever they would have wanted.
Issue 3 proponents were arguing that prices would be held down by competition with the black market. :smack:
Colorado got enough signatures to be on the ballot in 2016 for single payer health care. We will see what happens.
While that’s certainly interesting and important news, I’m not sure what relevance it has for this thread about marijuana.
Well, the person you’re replying to is the OP of this thread, and the title he gave to his thread was:
“What state ballot measures are pushing marijuana legalization or health reform in 2016?”
What’s even worse is that recently we’ve been discussing a ballot measure from 2015. We’re just horrible.
ETA: The cool smiley isn’t very cool. Deleted.
…Hm, so it is. I guess that I’m so used to seeing the first part of the title show up with an ellipsis after it, and the conversation is so dominated by marijuana so far, that I overlooked that. Mea culpa.