CA Jellies, what is the current political climate over there regarding prop 19?

There is a movement at my campus to vote down Proposition 23, but I haven’t heard a peep about Proposition 19 on campus. I’m not sure how to interpret that, to be honest.

I think it will be passed, though. Our state has strange priorities in that regard.

Personally, I could not feel more ambivalent about Proposition 19. I am voting yes, but I do not feel invested in whether it passes or fails. I’m far more concerned about who will be elected governor (our candidates are terrible.)

The polls show that the state is slightly in favor. But the election will be done in less than a month and we’ll see for sure if they were truthful.

Most of the people whom I encounter are in favor of it, but I’m a college student who only talks to college students, so that’s not exactly a representative sample.
Historically, college-aged citizens are notorious for not voting. But I have a feeling this will be one proposition that breaks the mould.

Right now our current governor (Schwarzenegger) does not approve. The conservative candidate (Whitman) said something along the lines of “Legalizing marijuana is one of the worst ideas ever”. The liberal candidate (Brown) does not seem to be for it, but does not outwardly call it a horrible idea. I think he realizes that, at the very least, legalizing it will be good for taxes, employment, and reducing prison population.
On November 2nd, we are voting on the proposition, as well as voting for the new governor.

It really depends on who you talk to and where you are.

Here’s an article from the San Diego Union/Tribune that talks to people on both sides of the issue.

California is divided 50/50 on this Proposition 19. Most of the people against it tend to be religious or Republican, or they have family in law enforcement.

Some of the people against it are pot smokers themselves brainwashed into thinking that it “will give the government more power”. They have a few tiny points in their arguments, but all the lawyers who’ve talked about the issue tend to agree with the pro-19 people.

Meanwhile, lots of people support it, including celebrities, some cops, lots of veterans, most stoners, most young businessmen, and most easygoing people.

It will be a very close vote, and if it fails, it does not mean that California does not want legalization. It just means Californians didn’t want this particular proposition to be the key used to open the Pandora’s Box of full-legalization. I say we open the box, but I’m patient. I know it will be legal one way or the other, within a decade. The medical usage law (Proposition 215), with its “any condition for which it provides relief” clause, along with state Senate Bill 420, and SB 1449 makes marijuana de-facto legalized in California already, as of this very moment. It is no longer enforced by many cops, airports, border patrol, etc. Yes I realize Border Patrol is federal, but i’m just reporting what I am experiencing. They are indeed allowing it with most people. Marijuana users who have doctors notes are allowed in many airports in California. Some airports allow marijuana smoking in the smokers lounges, and some airports (even International) allow it to be brought on as carry-on or as luggage.

President Obama promised to lay off medical marijuana users in states where it is legal. He made no such promise to recreational users.

So when the retail non-medical marijuana stores open, there will probably be D.E.A. raids against them, the way there were against the medical dispensaries during Bush’s tenure.

Proposition 19, if passed, will probably be challenged in the courts. I am sure it will pass that challenge eventually. Meanwhile, as of now, any citizen in California who has visited a doctor in the past 3 years can smoke, possess, grow, and transport marijuana by paying a marijuana doctor $100 to analyze the records of the regular doctor. He will then give you a note that is valid for one year. The note contains information that police and dispensaries can use to immediately verify the validity of such note.

Morally and logically speaking, marijuana should be legal. About half the people in California agree with me on that. And about half the people will vote to legalize it for all drinking-aged citizens and residents, next month.

Teehee ‘Senate bill 420’

Great responses guys, it’s saddening to hear that none of the Governor candidates have strong support for the bill, however it’s understandable as they are just trying to win the vote.

How would State v Federal law affect things? Will the DEA be cool eventually?

@joeysefika Federal law does trump state law, but Obama has promised that as long as the drug users are within the state law, he won’t be using federal resources to hunt them down. So for the time being, DEA should be cool. We’ll just have to hope that whomever wins the 2012 election does the same thing.

It may be slightly favored by more Californians, but not by voters.
This looks like a strong right turn out.

Federal law would technically override the state law yes, but federal law also says medicinal marijuana is illegal, and many states allow that without patients being hunted down by the feds.

I hope it passes myself. I don’t smoke it nor am I going to but in cost savings it would really benefit the nation. Utah is talking about making it legal as well which is a shock to me but I think all states should make it legal. The benefits outweight the issues. So I hope California starts the ball rolling.

When the feds raided California’s marijuana dispensaries during Bush’s presidency, Bush used the excuse that federal law overrides state laws. Even Obama shares Bush’s legal belief in that federal law overrides state laws. The only difference is that Obama has decided, that he will not enforce federal marijuana laws in states where it’s medically legal, by his own grace.

Does anyone disagree that the Constitution itself, overrides any federal statute or code? And if the Constitution is the highest law of America, then do not the 9th and 10th Amendments take precedence over any conflicting federal law… thereby making STATE law supreme to federal law on most issues? Here’s the 9th and 10th Amendments, which we all are acting as if they are repealed, but they have never been repealed: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people; The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

It takes some pretty heavy collective mental gymnastics to get around all that. And yet, somehow, our Country has gotten around all that, and we are now brainwashed into believing that the federal law (the statutes and codes) is supreme, when it is not. Only the federal Constitution is supreme.

The Constitution supports the States having their own laws.

@Kraigmo

I don’t necessarily disagree that the fed may not have the authority to outlaw Drugs, but the Supremacy clause gives them the power to overrule state law if they do. The Supremacy Clause makes federal legislation the supreme law of the land.

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

It will be interesting if it passes but I doubt it will have much revenue impact. I can’t imaging any legitimate store selling it. Mostly it will allow everyone to grow their own. I’m sure a few pot only stores will crop up but I just don’t see it being a big revenue provider. It’s not clear how it might affect even the sale of paraphernalia, most of which can’t be sold in any regular store. There are restrictions in the tobacco license. Anyway it does get confusing as to how they may apply it but with the federal law, selling it in any normal store seems unlikely. The risks are too great.

@Jaxk

“I’m sure a few pot only stores will crop up but I just don’t see it being a big revenue provider.”

There are already hundreds, if not thousands, of “pot only” stores in CA- right now they can only sell to patients. If they can sell to everybody, I do see some significant revenue possibilities.

@crisw

You may be right, I’m just sceptical. The projections are up to hundreds of millions but they put a lot of caveats with that. Now if the federal government eliminates the ban, that would make a significant difference.