With less than a month to go, it looks like the I-1068 campaign is not going to get the help it needs to get on the ballot. Using only volunteer gatherers (I’ve collected roughly 500 signatures myself), it’s still less than half-way to its signature goal. As Josh reports, the SEIU had initially considered funding paid signature gatherers to ensure it gets on the ballot in November – in part because it would greatly increase turnout among younger voters. If I-1068 gets on the ballot, supporters were looking to use Hempfest as a huge voter registration effort.
Instead, Democrats and the SEIU balked. With an initiative already on the ballot in California to provide some good data points, it’ll be interesting to see whether the backers of I-1068 are correct about how much value there would have been for Democrats to have a marijuana legalization initiative on the ballot – if it doesn’t make it.
Making things even more interesting, we would be able to compare the fates of both Barbara Boxer and Patty Murray; both incumbents, and both being challenged by well-known candidates with big pockets (assuming Fiorina makes it through her primary tomorrow). Although, to add an extra twist, Boxer inexplicably came out against California’s initiative at the beginning of April, and has since seen her favorability plummet since then. It’s not clear whether her opposition was the main reason for that huge drop (or if there just aren’t enough polling points yet to know how big the drop really is), but coming out against an initiative that remains extremely popular with both her base of liberal voters and independents certainly wasn’t smart.
It’s entirely possible that if I-1068 makes the ballot that Murray would follow in Boxer’s clumsy footsteps and publicly oppose it anyway. But if I were Dino Rossi, I’d be breathing a little easier about the likelihood of not having something on the ballot that encourages more younger and liberal voters to show up in November.
This so true. It’s even a bigger deal here because of the top two primary.
Younger and more progressive voters will come out in droves because of I-1068. And since there won’t be any Greens or Independents or Libertarians on the ballot, they would vote for Murray on their way to voting for I-1068.
Damn the Democratic Party is full of wimpy shmucks!
Lee–
Did you really think the “establishment” (aka Unions & their lackey’s) would support a pro-pothead Initiative? If you do, start smokin’ some better stuff.
500 sigs is a mediocre effort for such a high profile guy as you. And remember, you need about 300,000 sigs to get to the 241K more than likely. With the Pothead krowd signing these petitions, it’s probably more like 400,000…heavy pot usage combined with Prozac has been proven to cause early-Alzheimer’s Lee.
Thanks for the chuckle Lee.
When I read your post, you reminded me of John Wayne’s quote…especially made for the pothead krowd & it’s “leaders”
“Life is tough. It’s even tougher when you are stupid!”
—The Duke
I don’t think the youth vote will be a force in a non-prez election year.
[Deleted – off topic]
Lee,
Where do I get some sign-up sheets. I’d like to pass out some out. I’ve already signed, but my wife and plenty of others I know have not. Hoyt Axton wrote, “No, no, no, I don’t smoke it no more, I’m tired of waking up on the floor.” On the other hand, I believe it should be legal.
@2
“Life is tough. It’s even tougher when you are stupid!”
—The Duke
Your life must be excruciating. How do you do it?
@5
Go to SensibleWashington and find a local coordinator.
@3
That has historically been the case, but that’s why I want to look closely at what happens with California.
Lee @ 6
Cynical has developed an immunity to reason, facts, compassion, and even good conversation. He seems quite comfortable with what he is, despite the horizons he refuses to see. Some people never grow, never look out their front door. That would be Cynical.
I don’t see that I-1068 would be such an obvious boost to Democrats if it makes the ballot. In California, 59% of the Democrats support legalizing pot, but so do 46% of the Republicans, according to the Survey USA poll. Would Patty Murray endorse I-1068? Probably not. Nor would Dino Rossi for that matter. At most, I would give I-1068 a half percentage point boost to Murray if it makes the ballot. On the other hand, I can see I-1068 backfiring. Republican supporters of I-1068 won’t be upset or surprising when Rossi rejects it. But Democratic and liberal supporters of I-1068 could easily be pissed off if Murray reject it. And if Murray supports I-1068, it will turn some of her supporters against her as well.
So I see a Democratic strategy of simply ignoring I-1068 — just like the Republicans are doing! I am pretty sure I-1068 will make the ballot, if it is nearly halfway to the signature goal with almost a month to go. Maybe it will pass in November, maybe not.
Legalizing pot does make sense, but it is something legislatures never seem to do. And something few politicians say much about when it is on the ballot.
Somehow I doubt that Patty wants to run on a pot ticket against Rossi.
Unlees, Lee can find evidence that Rossi uses marijuana?
You’ll know pot will become legal when Monsanto patents some genetic variant and forces everyone to buy their seeds.
This just in:
Rossi endorses I-1068. “Potheads vote democrat most of the time, but if they stay stoned full time, the change for random voting on their end is higher”
Lee finally has a senate candidate he “feels good” about..and now campaigns for Rossi full time.
Sen. Patty Murray may be in more trouble than I thought. I was visiting my Aunt over the weekend and she’s thinking of supporting Rossi. She voted for Murray in 1992, 1998, and 2004. Now for some background she considers herself an independent, but back in the day would likely have been an “Evans Republican”.
She also happens to be a medical marijuana patient. She supports I-1068, has donated money to the campaign, and is gathering signatures.
So being “pro-pot” does not automatically make one “pro-Murray”. Also that someone who has supported Murray in her last 3 terms is seriously considering supporting Rossi (to the level of an official endorsement and campaign donations) speaks volumes.
She’s also not a big fan of electing Denny Heck to Congress in spite of knowing him from her charity work. She was much more excited about Pridemore and is currently leaning to Herrera.
Sen. Murray is going to have to bring her A game to her re-election campaign. Rossi is a real threat who could grab a big chunk of the state’s independents in November especially if he can get away with playing a nice guy and avoid taking a stand on anything particularly controversial.
@13
I completely agree with you, Chris. And maybe my post wasn’t clear about it, but I agree that solely being “pro-pot” will not automatically make one “pro-Murray”, but since younger voters in general tend to support Democrats far more strongly, an influx of additional younger voters going to the polls will have a positive downstream effect for Murray.
500 sigs is a whole lot of work. I once collected 1000, and it basically meant going out damn near every day for 2-3 hours, and checking the papers for any large gathering of people such as fairs, festivals, protests, etc. It basically consumed all my non-working, non-sleeping hours for those months.
Plus it’s guaranteed that you are going to get a-holes who oppose your init and have nothing better to do but harangue you, maybe step in between you and potential sign-ees, get in your face, bump up against you, etc. I had guys (always a guy) follow and pester me for literally hours. WTF, I am out there not getting paid, just trying to avail myself of democracy.
I would like to see the 8% requirement cut in half (at least) and paid gathering eliminated. Getting the sig of 1 in every 12 voters is an unreasonably high bar.
2 comments:
– democratic politicians who do not support legalization of marijuana and other rational drug policy reforms are shooting themselves in the foot. The younger generation is overwhelmingly in favor of legalization.
– I am a volunteer signature gatherer, too, and I have gathered over 1500 signatures. It is extremely time consuming, especially when you work full time. I’ve lost track of the hours I’ve spent. The 8% requirement is overwhelming for an all volunteer effort, but when you have big bucks behind you, not such a big deal. Just go out and hire lots of mercenaries, many of whom are from out of state. Or, have your employees (such as Costco is doing in-store for the privatization initiative effort) gather signatures as people come into the store. Something is broken in the initiative process, and really needs to be fixed.
@13 Chris
Your post surprises me .. not the auntie the pot part but auntie for Dino.
Can you elaborate?
Persoanlly, while I support Lee’s efforts in re legalizing MJ, I find it hard to justify this as a cause celebre when weighted against other issues.
It seems to me the Patty’s main tack needs to be tieing Dino to the alabatoros of Reprican extremism.
If she were from my home town I ‘spect there would already be a faux tea bagger out there pushing DR to the right.
[Deleted – off topic]
@17
Persoanlly, while I support Lee’s efforts in re legalizing MJ, I find it hard to justify this as a cause celebre when weighted against other issues.
Of course, because mass graves are unimportant as long as they’re in Mexico.
I’m curious to hear Chris’s answer to your other question, but as someone who occasionally hears the same sentiment, I’d guess it has to do with what a lot of people expected from Obama and the Democrats, but aren’t seeing (and drug policy is often a big part of that disillusionment).
@15
Plus it’s guaranteed that you are going to get a-holes who oppose your init and have nothing better to do but harangue you, maybe step in between you and potential sign-ees, get in your face, bump up against you, etc. I had guys (always a guy) follow and pester me for literally hours.
I have not had that happen to me with I-1068 at all, thankfully.
My 500 signature total is somewhat disappointing, but it’s primarily the result of having moved right in the middle of the effort, which killed about a month – and having a full-time job and a young family.
Lee-
Sheesh–
The worse things get for the Democrats, the more sensitive you get with your Delete Finger.
I was expanding on what Chris said and pointing out some polls that shows Murray’s dilemma with supporting or being tied to your mission.
@20
That’s not exactly what I recall being there. Please post again if I’m mistaken. Considering you’d already once tried to take this thread off-topic, your leash is very short little man.
@21 Ban the fucker for repeat violations and the problem’s solved. It’s not like the KLOWN contributes anything. Besides, he’s trying to bore me to death. Please put a stop to it before he succeeds.
500 signatures isn’t a bad effort at all, Lee.
Poor little stoner Lee. Look at it this way; you can use all those left over petitions for rolling paper, huh? :) Just be sure and recycle the rest. Whoa dude!
@22
Well, Darryl and I had thought about a way of banning people per thread – so that they’re banned from commenting on a single post – but not permanently. It isn’t something that WordPress can handle by default though, one of us would have to code it up somehow. In the case of Mr. Cynical, he would have been banned from this post after his off-topic comment at #4. His last comment looked like another of his continued re-postings of Rasmussen polling, so I just immediately deleted it. If it was something more relevant, though, and I was mistaken, I apologize.
Lee
Measuring anyone’s favorite cause against anyone else’s favorite cause is a violation of good sense.
Persoanlly, I would put health care reform at the top of my list snce unless that is solved, the US is a basket case .. MJ or not.
Back at MJ, what is the status of K2 in WA?
It’s your blog, but he repeatedly violates fair use, he’s repeatedly ignored warnings to stop. It seems to that he doesn’t stop because there’s no consequences for his actions other than the occasional deleted post. He’ll be back and he’ll do it again. Is that what you want?
@25
SJ – comment #17
SJ – comment #25
I couldn’t agree more.
Persoanlly, I would put health care reform at the top of my list snce unless that is solved, the US is a basket case
I don’t disagree, but marijuana is an important issue because of the level of crime in Mexico that results from the billions being made by the cartels (and the downstream effect that it has on Mexico’s economy and illegal immigration).
And I think that our government’s bipartisan insanity over drugs is a major factor in why so many people look at our government and see little difference between Republicans and Democrats. It adds to the belief that neither party is worth a damn, and that the only thing to do is vote out the incumbent, regardless of party. Drug policy isn’t the only factor in this (Wall Street and corporate control is a big one too), but for people who are familiar with pot (and there are more people who smoke pot in this country than belong to a union) there doesn’t appear to be much of a difference between the parties. And in the end, even if Democrats are much better on health care (and they are), a lot of people won’t be convinced of it – because the issue is far more complex, but their opinions are shaped largely by how the parties deal with pot (something they understand).
@26
Only Goldy makes the decision to ban someone. Believe me, I would have done it a long time ago.
Instead of complaining, do something.
The initiative does not look dead. All along, they thought they would have to do it alone, with only non paid volunteers. It just sucks that SEIU took so long to finally decide. I for one think that changing our nation’s illogical and harmful drug laws is a top priority.
In the meantime, everybody on this blog who actually cares about our country needs to get out there and start collecting signatures. I have done it and it’s fun as well as easy. I collected 125 during a few hours at Folk Life.
Go to http://www.sensiblewashington.org to find out more info.
or fill out this form:
http://sensiblewashington.org/volunteer/
Or call Sidney, the Capitol Hill coordinator at 206-432-2797.
Or call 425-577-4711 or 425-572-0899
I have no problemn with pot or most other controlled substances being legal. What a person does to their own brain is their business.
I do wonder-
The initiative impacts only state enforcement of marijauna laws. Don’t the feds still enforce it? I assume 1068 sets up no production or distribution systems, just instructs the state and municipalities that pot is legal in Washington effectively. Is this accurate?
So far as crime, in Mexico or here, is concerned I really don’t think it will slow much. The gangs growing and selling to or in the US will just change drugs. Do we continue to legalise drugs with active harms to control crime?
I can’t see how we realize a savings in drug interdiction. Governments don’t give up money, they re-allocate it. No pot? Fine, we’ll beef up interdiction on cocaine or meth. The numbers with which I’m familiar say few arrests and fewer prison sentences come from personal use of pot. I could be wrong, but from this angle too no real benefit seems to come from legalisation.
Personally, I don’t care as I don’t smoke pot and never have. If the argument is simply that pot is a choice an adult has a right to make I’ll buy that. subject to all the restrictions we place on alchohol. The side arguments seem to me to be distractions.
Steve-
Typical of the Left. Screech to ban descenting opinions when you are in power.
Shameful. Re-think that. You are soon to be out of power…and would react harshly (and rightly so) if someone tried that on you.
Lee-
Apology accepted. Just because I post a Rasmussen Poll showing Democrats -9 in the recent Generic Congressional Poll to backup my point about Murray needing to be careful in what she gets involved in, shouldn’t be reason to delete it. Rasmussen is the most accurate Poll the past 5 years. You can accept it or reject it….but it’s relevant.
And quoting 2 paragraphs from a Rasmussen Poll does NOT violate Fair Use Steve.
Grow up and wise up little man.
@30
The initiative impacts only state enforcement of marijauna laws. Don’t the feds still enforce it? I assume 1068 sets up no production or distribution systems, just instructs the state and municipalities that pot is legal in Washington effectively. Is this accurate?
Yes, that’s accurate.
So far as crime, in Mexico or here, is concerned I really don’t think it will slow much.
It will for similar reasons to why the end of alcohol prohibition made it impossible for organized crime to maintain their once astronomical profits.
The gangs growing and selling to or in the US will just change drugs.
They make roughly 60% of their money from pot. Unless you think ending marijuana prohibition will somehow cause people to start doing drugs other than pot at higher rates, then the logical outcome is that the organized crime groups will see their profits fall by at least half.
Do we continue to legalise drugs with active harms to control crime?
Yes, and in fact, you can significantly cut back on crime by undercutting the heroin market by treating addicts in maintenance clinics (as Switzerland and several other countries have already been doing).
I can’t see how we realize a savings in drug interdiction. Governments don’t give up money, they re-allocate it. No pot? Fine, we’ll beef up interdiction on cocaine or meth.
This may surprise you, but I agree with you on this somewhat. But I think you will still see reductions in interdiction related to resources specifically used for pot (helicopters that fly over parks, etc). You’ll also save money from having fewer people going through courtrooms and taking up jail space.
Personally, I don’t care as I don’t smoke pot and never have. If the argument is simply that pot is a choice an adult has a right to make I’ll buy that. subject to all the restrictions we place on alchohol. The side arguments seem to me to be distractions.
Couldn’t agree more. Thanks for the comment.
@31
Rasmussen is the most accurate Poll the past 5 years.
Not quite. Better than average, but far from the most accurate.
Lost @ 30: The effect on the budget is complicated. As long as we are only talking about the state (and not the federal government), then what we would see is primarily a reduction in prosecution, court, and probation costs. It is true that this will probably then be used up by other priorities, but I guess that’s one of the points of the initiative. I doubt police resources would be effected much, because pot possession charges are usually a secondary or incidental result of a stop, not the subject of a full-blown investigation.
If a corrections officer isn’t trying to make sure a hundred guys have done their community service hours for minor pot possession charges, he has more time to pay attention to what’s happening to people like Maurice Clemmens.
Lee and RHP,
Some years ago I read a number of books on consensual crime. For purposes of definition, most agreed this meant actions taken by one or more adults on that adults volition. Prostitution, illegal narcotics etc were the primary focus of the best of them.
You’ll get no argument from me that taking an otherwise productive citizen and incarcerating them for a ‘crime’ that affects no non-consenting person is poor policy. Re-allocation of governent funds to other more pressing needs would not necessarily be bad.
You’ll get no argument that funds currently used to incarcerate might better be used to treat addiction. Though this one is stickier. I have a nephew who went through addiction treatment twice. Neither time worked. What worked was having his jaw broken in an argument while his ‘friends’ watched. That changed his perspective on the kids he was spending time with and the drugs that were the only real common interest he had with them. Don’t get me wrong, as a kid we didn’t interfere in fights that meant throwing a punch or two, but when someone took out a baseball bat, or a couple guys ganged up on one, real friends broke it up. At any rate, the will to end addiction is a needed component, and court ordered treatment without it is of little worth and expensive.
I guess I was poorly saying that the most powerful argument is the one I hear least often. An adult has a right to act as he or she sees fit, so long as others aren’t negatively impacted by that act. The law has no interest whatever in such acts.
The author made many of the same points you do
@14, 17, 19
Lee and SJ,
I really don’t understand her dissatisfaction with Murray. I know at least part of it is she’s met the Senator and thought she was dumb as a post. She’s also met Rossi and had some professional contact with him while he was doing the budget deal under Locke. She thinks Murray has been in DC too long and is part of the problem. She sees Dino as a consensus builder and doesn’t see that he is unlikely to continue that record if he goes to DC.
Another reason I’m surprised is my Aunt isn’t particularly against earmarks, she thinks that is what your members of congress are for. Sen. Murray has also been very good to Boeing and my Aunt thinks what is good for Boeing is good for Washington.
Frankly I was somewhat more surprised by her support for I-1068. I know she’s been for legalization for a while, but for her to even sign the initiative, much less donate and gather signatures is a huge professional risk for her. She’s had friends and colleagues ask to sign who she never would have thought would support marijuana legalization. On the other hand she has had a hard time convincing some people who support legalization to sign I-1068 because they are worried they might have problems if the fact that they signed ever became public.
“Screech to ban descenting opinions”
Fuck your opinions. They don’t mean shit to me. My real problem with you is that you haven’t displayed even an ounce of wit in 10,000 posts. Face it, KLOWN, when you’re on the bench your team plays a better game. They should be the ones telling you to fuck off.
I’ve read the law and enough legal analysis to feel confident that the moderators here have been completely justified in deleting countless KLOWN posts. They have repeatedly warned you of your violation of federal copyright law. If you’re banned it needn’t be for you sharing your insipid shit-for-brains opinions. It should be because you show absolutely no respect for the law and you’ve repeatedly ignored the moderators’s warnings to stop violating it.
You can go fuck yourself now, KLOWN.
@36 Chris
Sounds to me as if the tactic to take on Rossi is to force him to take stands on tea bag issues.
The obvious starting point, now that he can not hide behind the governor is not responsible for — act, is for someone to out him on abortion.
@33 Better than average, but far from the most accurate.
Notice that Cynical goes quiet and drops off the radar when Obama’s numbers tick up on Rasmussen.
@35 Just so you know, when you tell us what you think, that’s something that can be respected even though we might disagree. When you tell us what we think, well, not so much.
A Rossi-Didier debate would be so much fun to watch, especially if it were to take place in front of a torches and pitchforks teabagger mob.
Re 40
Fair point.
@40: You are entirely too kind and a bit too generous (i.e., “us” and “we”).
I don’t give a shit what Klynical, Pudpuller, completelylost, et al think. They’re just repeating lies, lost’s glibertarian “agreement” with pot legalization notwithstanding.
Even using the word think is way too polite. And Steve, respect was beyond the pale, man.
They’re just steaming piles of horseshit we have to pass by to get to something of value here.
As Goldy has pointed out repeatedly, their clicks and page views pay him — a little.
Keep on clicking, troll motherfuckers!
@38
I agree, forcing Rossi to publicly embrace the teabagger agenda along with the less popular in Washington parts of the national Republican platform will sink him come November.
Besides if Murray can get Constantine-like numbers in King County in November she won’t have much to worry about.
Zotz,
It’s good to know that respectful and insightful political discourse is not entirely beyond you.
Here’s a thought though. Try to imagine that even those with whose politics you disagree might love and want the best for their country. I know, for a bitter angry person like you this is a stretch, but try. I can disagree with your take on what this ‘best’ might be without assuming you to be a liar, an obstructionist or malificent. You might try doing the same if only for your own sake.
Oh, and BTW, don’t bother trying to tell me what I think (glibertarian or otherwise.) You don’t know me from Adam and have not the knowledge to make those statements.
Have a pleasant day yourself.
39. don spews:
You are right don.
ObaMao is -15 on today’s Strong Approval/Strong Disapproval Poll.
And the Democrat Party is -9 on the Generic Congressional Poll.
Does that make you feel better don?
Zotz @ 40–
Wow. Impressive post.
Seems like as ObaMao and the Democrats sink lower & lower in the polls…you get testier & testier.
I slighly over a year ago you KLOWNS acting like you could never be defeated.
Arrogant…stupidly arrogant.
And your “misleader” arrogantly decides to mock and ridicule folks concerned about the debt and his massive deficit spending asking such mean-spirited questions as:
“How are you planning to pay this back”
The Left is an angry lot.
Anger is a good motivator to GET power.\
It is a horrible emotion when you are in power & trying to retain it.
You blew it.
I signed!
@47: Angry? Not at all.
Intermittent reinforcement and behavior frequency… I don’t imagine that bit of manipulation even crossed your lizard brain barrier, but no matter…
Here’s your pellet!
Keep on clicking, motherfucker! The faster the better! That’s what rats and trolls do!
Cynny @ 47
The Left is an “angry lot”? And, the Right, I suppose, is not? You observe those Teabag folks, lately, by chance? Yeah, that’s a loving group of folks.
@43 “You are entirely too kind and a bit too generous (i.e., “us” and “we”).”
You are quite correct in that I didn’t word that one well. It should have been “I” and “me”.
“Even using the word think is way too polite. And Steve, respect was beyond the pale, man.”
“I don’t give a shit what Klynical, Pudpuller, completelylost, et al think”
I wouldn’t feel right not showing someone respect if they deserve it. There are some commenters from the right who post here who have earned my respect, even my friendship. Others show the potential for earning at least my respect. Showing some witless, racist KLOWN absolutely zero respect and not giving a rat’s ass WTF he thinks? That’s me too. I’ll be trying to stay true to that as well.
Spot on about the “we” and “us” thing. However, that’s the only change I make in my comment to Lost.
@50 Yeah, nothing angry about those torch and pitchfork totin’ teabaggers.
@40
Exactly.
@36
Thanks for the follow-up post. I’m also running into a number of people who support I-1068, but will not sign because they’re concerned what might happen to them. I’ve tried to tell people that there’s hardly anyone who should worry about this. Police officers, teachers, and federal employees have signed these petitions. The security guard at a local club was even asking people to sign it for me.
@51: NTW, consider it a stern finger wagging (while winking)…;-)
lost does appear to at least be trying lately. Almost sappy. I assume he’s probably drinking while blogging. Beer does that to you.
54
If beer produces such results, then I’d like to prescribe beer for all our trolls before posting.
54 and 55,
Now you’re just being unpleasant. I skip beer in favor of straight whisky when conversing with liberals.
Well, the shed won’t side itself, so all of you have a good day.
Perhaps Goldy we need to legalize pot.
To smoke in a car, not your mouth.
Bong Party/BP, mon!
Yeah, dude high fuel!
:-)
lost @ 56
Actually, I think both Zotz and I were being complimentary. In our own fashion, of course. Frankly, I’ve appreciated your recent lucid (but mostly wrong) commentary. I haven’t seen much of that from your side of the political fence lately. Hope you keep it up.
If all the Democrats have is the issue of pot for young voters then they don’t have much of a platform. Kinda like seeing principles go up in smoke-LOL!.
Hey, Carrot Patty–don’t bogart that joint!
@59
If all the Democrats have is the issue of pot for young voters then they don’t have much of a platform.
You have it exactly backwards. Young voters tend to think that marijuana prohibition is a more important issue than Democrats do.
58
Sorry, dry humor works better face to face. That’s what I was attempting and, sadly, failing. Oh well.