Reason Writers Around Town: Mike Riggs in The New Republic on the Prohibition Movement's Shrinking War Chest
In every state with a marijuana-related ballot initiative, prohibitionists were financially out-gunned by the marijuana legalization movement (including Oregon, where the pro-pot side managed to raise less than $70,000).
In every state with a marijuana-related ballot initiative, prohibitionists were financially out-gunned by the marijuana legalization movement (including Oregon, where the pro-pot side managed to raise less than $70,000).
While opponents of legalization claim that two wealthy people—Peter Lewis and George Soros—tipped the scales, that argument doesn't explain the prohibition movement's failure to raise a remotely competitive amount of cash. Writing in The New Republic, Mike Riggs argues that it's not the fault of Soros and Lewis that their fellow one-percenters didn't donate to the anti-drug movement. More importantly, if you take Lewis and Soros out of the equation, the legalizers still outraised their opponents:
While Lewis and Soros gave a combined 3.54 million to New Approach Washington (the main legalization effort in Washington state), there were plenty of other wealthy pro-legalization donors. The family-run Riverstyx Foundation, which is based in Kirkland, Washington and "believes that society should serve its citizens by offering the greatest possibilities for growth and life enhancement," gave $500,000. Phil Harvey, head of the family planning/HIV-prevention nonprofit DKT International (and a donor to the Reason Foundation, which publishes the magazine I work for), gave $105,000. Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps, which uses imported hemp oil in its products and whose current CEO, David Bronner, was arrested protesting for marijuana reform in front of the White House earlier this year, gave $75,000. Henry van Ameringen, a New York LGBTQ rights advocate and heir to the largest fragrance and flavor company in the world, gave $50,000. William H. Clapp of the anti-poverty Seattle International Foundation gave $35,000. Retired class action lawyer Judith Bendich gave $30,000. Environmentalist Nancy Nordhoff gave $25,000. Seattle attorney Peter Goldman gave $15,000. Seattle environmentalist William Pope gave $11,000. Investor Rene Ruiz gave $11,000. Former Microsoft researcher George Heidorn gave $7,500. George Alfred Zimmer, co-founder and current chairman of Men's Warehouse, gave $2,500. The list goes on, and includes pockets that range from deep to relatively modest.
As for the roughly $16,000 spent by opponents of I-502? More than $9,000 of it came from medical marijuana dispensaries concerned about the initiative's DUID ("driving under the influence of drugs") provision, which could expose patients who drive with THC in their system--though not necessarily while high--to police harassment. The largest single contribution from a dispensary opposed to I-502--which went to the Safe Access Alliance--was $2,500; the largest single contribution from a private citizen opposed to I-502--which went to No on 502--was $1,800.
In other words, not only did opponents of legalization in Washington not have a Peter Lewis or George Soros on their side; they didn't really have anyone else either.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
If money can't buy elections these days, can it buy voter-initiated policy changes?
Unnameed.
"As for the roughly $16,000 spent by opponents of I-502? More than $9,000 of it came from medical marijuana dispensaries concerned about the initiative's DUID ("driving under the influence of drugs") provision, which could expose patients who drive with THC in their system--though not necessarily while high--to police harassment."
um, no. that's their ALLEGED concern. it is entirely likely that loss of $$$ and influence upon passage of recreational mj was a factor, if not the entire factor, etc.
iow,just because somebody claims X is their motivation, you don't assume it's true. reason did that by not using the word 'alleged' etc.
certainly, medical MJ dispensaries saw potential to lose money, political influence, etc. upon passage of 502, and that should be at least considered vs. blindly accepting their self serving claims
^^^ this.
The "medical marijuana" types are the worst rent seekers I have ever seen.
certainly, medical MJ dispensaries saw potential to lose money, political influence, etc. upon passage of 502, and that should be at least considered vs. blindly accepting their self serving claims
Obviously, that explanation is just a little more plausible than them being concerned about DUI.
Now it's time for Bamey to don that DEA cap and ride forward into the quagmire. I am already stocked up on popcorn and beer.
If only Peter Tosh were here...