Drug Policy

The Perils of Pushing Pot Prohibition

Most Americans say the feds should not interfere with marijuana legalization in Colorado and Washington.

|

Three months ago, voters in Colorado and Washington approved ballot initiatives aimed at legalizing the possession, production, and distribution of marijuana. A month later, Attorney General Eric Holder said the Justice Department would settle on a response to this historic development "relatively soon."

How soon is that? I have been trying to get a response to that question from Justice Department spokeswoman Nanda Chitre for about a month, but she is not returning my calls. Meanwhile, the U.S. attorney's offices in Colorado and Washington decline to give any indication of how they will treat the state-licensed marijuana stores that are scheduled to open next year.

This caginess may be a good sign, reflecting the Obama administration's awareness that interfering with these experiments in pharmacological tolerance would be politically perilous. Survey data released last week indicate that most Americans think marijuana should be legalized, while an even larger majority says states should be free to make that decision.

In a Reason-Rupe Public Opinion Survey completed on January 21, 53 percent of respondents said "the government should treat marijuana the same as alcohol." Asked whether the federal government should arrest pot smokers in Colorado and Washington, 72 percent said no; more strikingly, by a margin of 2 to 1, the respondents said the federal government should not arrest newly legal growers or sellers either. Two-thirds of the respondents took that view.

These results indicate that some people who oppose marijuana legalization nevertheless believe the choice should be left to the states, as a consistent federalist would. Reflecting that tendency, most Republicans and self-identified conservatives in the Reason-Rupe poll supported marijuana prohibition, but most also said the federal government should not try to impose that policy on Colorado and Washington. A CBS News poll conducted in November generated similar results.

In a December interview with ABC News, President Obama said his administration had no plans to go after marijuana consumers, which the federal government almost never does anyway, but he did not say how state-licensed suppliers will be treated. He added that "we're going to need to have a conversation" about the interplay between state legalization and continued federal prohibition.

So far that conversation has been pretty one-sided. Last month Washington Gov. Jay Inslee talked to Attorney General Holder about marijuana legalization for 45 minutes. Afterward Inslee called the meeting "very satisfying" and "a confidence builder," although he emphasized that Holder had made no commitments regarding the possibility of trying to block legalization through civil litigation, criminal prosecution, or forfeiture threats.

In the meantime, both Colorado and Washington have begun writing the rules for growing, processing, and selling marijuana. The Washington State Liquor Control Board is holding hearings on its marijuana regulations, and in Colorado a task force appointed by Gov. John Hickenlooper is putting together recommendations, due at the end of this month, for state legislators.          

It surely is not lost on Obama that marijuana legalization got more votes in Colorado, a swing state, than he did, and nearly as many as he did in reliably blue Washington. Any attempt to override the will of those voters would provoke a hostile response not just from people in Colorado and Washington but from the large majority of Americans across the country who believe the federal government should mind its own business.

Wanda James, co-founder of Simply Pure, a Denver-based manufacturer of cannabis-infused food products that until now has served medical marijuana dispensaries, understands that getting into the recreational market could be risky. But she argues that trying to shut down that market would be risky for the president and his party.

"Three million people in America on election night voted to legalize marijuana," James says. "I can't imagine the U.S. government starting some arrest campaign on people who are compliant with their state laws. I just can't see the American government doing this when the will of the people is saying 'enough.'"

NEXT: Jacob Sullum Debates Gun Control With Adam Winkler on Bloggingheads.tv

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they 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 for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

26 responses to “The Perils of Pushing Pot Prohibition

  1. I don’t really see the political downside for the Obama administration to continued enforcement of the federal marijuana ban. He’s not running for re-election and few are pressing him on his hypocrisy.

    1. Bingo! Also; it is hard to underestimate the intelligence of a politician who thinks he knows better than the voters he is supposed to serve.

      1. I don’t think it has as much to do with low intelligence as it does a high level of hubris and a superiority complex. These types honestly believe that they know what’s best for you and you should just do as your told like a good citizen.

  2. First.

    Also, the Executive Department refuses to clarify how, or even whether, they’re going to enforce the Controlled Substances Act? Could there be any clearer abnegation of the Rule of Law?

    Fucking Progressive Technocrats are happy to use their power to make commands like a tin-pot dictator and his army of bureaucrats…

    1. Rule of law was throw out the window the minute the feds usurped state police power; so not enforcing an unconstitutional law is a step in the right direction.

      1. More like “arbitrarily” enforcing, which is SOP under “prosecutorial discretion.”

        1. right.

        2. I don’t see what’s arbitrary about FUCK YOU THAT’S WHY.

  3. “I just can’t see the American government doing this when the will of the people is saying ‘enough.'”

    With all due respect, what have you been smoking?

  4. So far that conversation has been pretty one-sided.

    This is a national conversation of great importance. So like all national conversations of great importance, they don’t have time to listen to your side, just to harangue you like a child.

    1. SHUT THE FUCK UP, you racist teabagging hick, we’re having a CONVERSATION!

  5. may be a good sign, reflecting the Obama administration’s awareness that interfering with these experiments in pharmacological gun ownership tolerance would be politically perilous. Survey data released last week indicate that most Americans think marijuana “assault weapons” should be legalized, while an even larger majority [of his prime voting demographic of young people] says states citizens should be free to make that decision own them.

    And yet…

    1. </blockquote and yet…

      1. Oh, whatever.

  6. What bugs me is that even if Obama and the Feddies (now there’s a band name) went all Eliot Ness on both growers and smokers, the vast majority of progressives in Colorado and Washington would STILL fail to see the flaws in their Statist religion.

    1. …and most would continue to fellate their Dear Leader without a second thought.

  7. ” I just can’t see the American government doing this when the will of the people is saying ‘enough.'”

    Clearly this woman is lacking in imagination. I’m sure the Dear Leader will show her the error of her ways soon enough.

  8. upto I saw the bank draft 4 $4673, I accept that…my… mom in-law woz like realy making money parttime online.. there friends cousin has done this 4 less than 17 months and resantly cleard the dept on their villa and purchased a gorgeous audi. we looked here, http://xurl.es/tt3nh

  9. Although I welcome cannabis stories I feel like Reason has been writing this same story over and over. Come up with a new angle guys.

    1. Medical Marijuana prohibition is a crime against humanity and a violation of the religious precept – heal the sick.

      CB1 CB2

  10. I’m working with old equipment here and a 56k modem, and it’s been frustrating trying to read Hit & Run, but today I discovered a little hack that allows me to read without annoying hangs & crashes: I just download & save it, go off line, then delete all the head material before reading it. If I leave the material between the head tags in place, MSIE 6 tries seemingly forever to execute some commands which assume net access (preferably FAST net access, it seems).

  11. cruel are the times, when we are traitors ?
    And do not know ourselves; when we hold rumour ?
    From what we fear, yet know not what we fear, ?
    But float upon a wild and violent sea ?
    Each way and none.

  12. Jack. I just agree… Troy`s remark is inconceivable, yesterday I bought a gorgeous Acura after earning $4030 this past five weeks and in excess of ten-grand this past-month. it’s certainly the most-comfortable work Ive ever done. I began this six months/ago and almost straight away started bringin in at least $70, p/h. I went to this website, http://www.FLY38.COM

  13. How To Destroy The Prohibition Party

    Medical Marijuana prohibition is a crime against humanity and a violation of the religious precept – heal the sick.

    CB1 CB2

  14. Nicest chat and chat Iraqi entertaining Adject all over the world
    http://www.iraaqna.com

  15. my neighbor’s ex-wife makes $62 an hour on the internet. She has been fired from work for 5 months but last month her pay was $15306 just working on the internet for a few hours. Go to this web site and read more http://www.FLY38.COM

Comments are closed.