Majority of Americans support Medicare for All. But both parties are against it. Marijuana legalization is easier to pass than healthcare because there are no entrenched corporate interests against it:
Imho, a significant part of the problem is gerrymandering [1]. A certain party has outsized influence because of gerrymandering (but this shouldn’t absolve moderate/corporate Dems of their failings either, especially with Biden opposing legalization; read the room my dude).
1.8 million voters over the age of 55 age out every year, and election cycles are every two years. We’ll get there eventually (on Medicare for All and marijuana legalization), it’s just a matter of time. Until then, keep knocking it out at the state level. [2]
The Senate is split 50-50. It's fair to say one half of that is more strongly opposed to it than the other since their states even rejected the Medicaid expansion accompanying Obamacare.
So it sounds like the Senate is doing a poor job of representing the people. Which leads to the obvious question: why have a Senate at all?
I know you just brought it up as an example, but I'm much more interested in a Direct Primary Care healthcare strategy over Medicare for All. https://www.dpcare.org/
That's not a reasonable comparison -- medical care is a much more complicated question, and people are much less likely to underatand what yes/no really mean.
> This is particularly the case among adults ages 75 and older: Just 32% say marijuana should be legal for recreational and medical use, by far the lowest share for any age category and 21 percentage points lower than adults in the next-oldest age group
Sadly most elected officials fall in these age groups.
Legalizing weed at the Federal level will be a huge win even in states that have already done so. The industry has a very hard time dealing with banking, credit card payments, advertising etc. right now.
It bothers me that this needs to be done piecemeal, substance by substance.
Our bodies are our own to build - they are own to destroy (or alter, or any other damn thing). The whole point of the war on drugs was to imprison minorities. The whole concept of drug prohibition should be done away with.
Millions of people are sitting in prison in the US simply because they did something entirely consensual and nonviolent, engaging in a willing transaction with an adult, and victimized no one.
The idea that you can't put whatever you want into your own body is diametrically opposed to the desire for personal liberty for which the US is known.
They could be our own to destroy if that didn't impact people around you. It's the same with DUI - causing a crash doesn't only destroy your life. Or getting addicted to the point you can't care for your children.
I’m fairly convinced we’re only about 5-10 acquisitions away from cannabis becoming legal via the legislative branch.
There’s 3 larges sectors that are still holdouts. Healthcare, alcohol, and tobacco industries.
Healthcare will never flip because there’s almost no revenue for them. The only thing they might be able to do is partner with Bayer and license/patent specific strains.
Tobacco exists because it’s addictive. CBD and hemp already offer sedative natural alternatives that are healthier and safer for the consumer. If you find anybody taking Wellbutrin or any drug that can cessate the nicotine withdrawal, they can easily kick the habit via cold turkey, or substitution.
Finally the last big industry is alcohol. I could talk about this pivot for hours but ultimately, look at what AB/InBev is doing. What have they poured millions of r&d into lately? Seltzer drinks. Edibles are expected to be the largest growth segment of the legal cannabis industry for the next 10 years. I already see it in various circles. Seltzer drinks are easily the next step for the alcohol industry. The issue now is how are these cards going to fall. Will they try to pace their way and drop tons of r&d into the legalization/testing efforts or will they try to leverage all of the existing infrastructure that exists in the legal cannabis industry?
That’s why I think we’re only about 5-10 acquisitions away from finding the answer. And once we have the answer, legalization will easily fall afterward.
Edit to add: Biden is doing a great job but this wasn’t one of his bullet points. He might have a difference of opinion. He might pursue something at the federal level. But I’m not counting on it. I fully believe that if these acquisitions happen before 2022 we’ll see it on ballots.
The biggest change I noticed with respect to legalization is that it used to be the case that you couldn't walk around the streets of downtown Seattle without being offered weed by street vendors, and sometimes other drugs. After legalization and marijuana stores the street vendors (at least those I encountered) basically disappeared.
I don't think anyone has been able to conclusively say that marijuana legalization actually increases the percentage of smokers in any state where it has been implemented.
I come to it from the view of prohibition being a known source of power for cartels. I suspect if the various prohibitions were relaxed enough (and safely) that cartels would lose a lot power. Could see less immigrants fleeing cartel violence?
But I fear legalization too. I fear people taking it too far and forcing a backlash and a new prohibition.
What even is taking marijuana "too far"? It has been legal for >66% of the country in some form for many years now, and society has not descended into chaos.
Funny enough in this case how Kamala Harris feels might be more important, since she'll likely cast the deciding vote in the Senate. I can't see Biden vetoing the legalization bill if it passes both chambers, regardless of his personal views.
I found myself wondering why we can’t just pass popular legislation as individual clean bills. In a climate where two thirds of Americans support a wealth tax, why not simply send a wealth tax to the Senate and see what happens?
The answer, unfortunately, lies in the many layers upon layers of ‘dealmaking’ that happens in congress that lead to popular bills being bundled with less popular ones. Combined with the trend of trying to pass everything through reconciliation, it means that we almost never get to see congress legislate individual issues.
That’s a shame. In software, we’d recognize this all-or-nothing approach as bad practice. It would be no surprise why nothing ever gets done, and we’d make a new process that favors incremental improvements.
> Combined with the trend of trying to pass everything through reconciliation, it means that we almost never get to see congress legislate individual issues.
Having to go through budget reconciliation is another symptom of the same problem. The filibuster used to get used very infrequently. Now that the parties have clearly sorted themselves there is actually less cross-party dealmaking, instead everything has to go through reconciliation which also requires that bills get changed to fit the requirements of budget reconciliation. It's just another outcome of our hyperpartisanship.
The hyperpartisanship and two-party system is also the reason why even popular legislation cannot pass. If it passes it's a win for the governing party. If it doesn't it gets held against the government party because they should be in control. If they cannot get it done it gets blamed on them bring weak. So why would the opposition allow passing even popular legislation? McConnell explained this very openly and clearly.
I've supported legalization efforts in two states. But I kindof have regrets, now. And in fact, if I were in charge, I might leave it as an infraction.
I don't really want it to be illegal, but as far as I can tell, the same thing that happens to cigarette smokers happens to weed smokers: perspective on the fact that smoking is the atmospheric equivalent of peeing in the pool is lost.
And I wake up like I did last night at 1:30am having had a neighbor opt me into the experience via my open window next to the patio. Yay, personal liberty.
I have zero problem with people choosing it for themselves, but please, figure out a way to keep it personal.
That existed before legalization. The only difference is now you can't tie up precious law enforcement resources because of unfavorable air currents. You can still appeal to your city or landlord. They might not take it seriously, which, given the level of your personal suffering, seems reasonable.
This is a pretty silly way to think about the issue. Loud music, dogs barking, kids running around on the floor above you, smoke of any kind, a bed frame hitting the wall repeatedly. I wouldn't rethink the legal status of music, dogs or children because of some bad neighbors.
1cvmask|4 years ago
https://morningconsult.com/2021/03/24/medicare-for-all-publi...
jacob2484|4 years ago
zachrose|4 years ago
AlexTWithBeard|4 years ago
Legalizing weed doesn't get into anyone's pocket.
And make no mistake: there are some big names in the battle agains marijuana [1]
[1] - https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/oct/22...
toomuchtodo|4 years ago
1.8 million voters over the age of 55 age out every year, and election cycles are every two years. We’ll get there eventually (on Medicare for All and marijuana legalization), it’s just a matter of time. Until then, keep knocking it out at the state level. [2]
[1] https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/democracy/reports/20...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis_by_U.S._j...
paxys|4 years ago
triceratops|4 years ago
The Senate is split 50-50. It's fair to say one half of that is more strongly opposed to it than the other since their states even rejected the Medicaid expansion accompanying Obamacare.
So it sounds like the Senate is doing a poor job of representing the people. Which leads to the obvious question: why have a Senate at all?
infogulch|4 years ago
chmod600|4 years ago
ddingus|4 years ago
tamaharbor|4 years ago
paxys|4 years ago
Sadly most elected officials fall in these age groups.
Legalizing weed at the Federal level will be a huge win even in states that have already done so. The industry has a very hard time dealing with banking, credit card payments, advertising etc. right now.
iaw|4 years ago
[0] https://guides.loc.gov/116th-congress-book-list
chmod600|4 years ago
Stevvo|4 years ago
sneak|4 years ago
Our bodies are our own to build - they are own to destroy (or alter, or any other damn thing). The whole point of the war on drugs was to imprison minorities. The whole concept of drug prohibition should be done away with.
Millions of people are sitting in prison in the US simply because they did something entirely consensual and nonviolent, engaging in a willing transaction with an adult, and victimized no one.
The idea that you can't put whatever you want into your own body is diametrically opposed to the desire for personal liberty for which the US is known.
viraptor|4 years ago
unknown|4 years ago
[deleted]
wcchandler|4 years ago
There’s 3 larges sectors that are still holdouts. Healthcare, alcohol, and tobacco industries.
Healthcare will never flip because there’s almost no revenue for them. The only thing they might be able to do is partner with Bayer and license/patent specific strains.
Tobacco exists because it’s addictive. CBD and hemp already offer sedative natural alternatives that are healthier and safer for the consumer. If you find anybody taking Wellbutrin or any drug that can cessate the nicotine withdrawal, they can easily kick the habit via cold turkey, or substitution.
Finally the last big industry is alcohol. I could talk about this pivot for hours but ultimately, look at what AB/InBev is doing. What have they poured millions of r&d into lately? Seltzer drinks. Edibles are expected to be the largest growth segment of the legal cannabis industry for the next 10 years. I already see it in various circles. Seltzer drinks are easily the next step for the alcohol industry. The issue now is how are these cards going to fall. Will they try to pace their way and drop tons of r&d into the legalization/testing efforts or will they try to leverage all of the existing infrastructure that exists in the legal cannabis industry?
That’s why I think we’re only about 5-10 acquisitions away from finding the answer. And once we have the answer, legalization will easily fall afterward.
Edit to add: Biden is doing a great job but this wasn’t one of his bullet points. He might have a difference of opinion. He might pursue something at the federal level. But I’m not counting on it. I fully believe that if these acquisitions happen before 2022 we’ll see it on ballots.
ALittleLight|4 years ago
chenzhekl|4 years ago
protomyth|4 years ago
paxys|4 years ago
chmod600|4 years ago
ianai|4 years ago
But I fear legalization too. I fear people taking it too far and forcing a backlash and a new prohibition.
paxys|4 years ago
astrea|4 years ago
GeekyBear|4 years ago
>Biden’s blunt opposition to marijuana legalization
https://www.vox.com/22387746/biden-marijuana-weed-legalizati...
paxys|4 years ago
alexose|4 years ago
The answer, unfortunately, lies in the many layers upon layers of ‘dealmaking’ that happens in congress that lead to popular bills being bundled with less popular ones. Combined with the trend of trying to pass everything through reconciliation, it means that we almost never get to see congress legislate individual issues.
That’s a shame. In software, we’d recognize this all-or-nothing approach as bad practice. It would be no surprise why nothing ever gets done, and we’d make a new process that favors incremental improvements.
ajmurmann|4 years ago
Having to go through budget reconciliation is another symptom of the same problem. The filibuster used to get used very infrequently. Now that the parties have clearly sorted themselves there is actually less cross-party dealmaking, instead everything has to go through reconciliation which also requires that bills get changed to fit the requirements of budget reconciliation. It's just another outcome of our hyperpartisanship.
The hyperpartisanship and two-party system is also the reason why even popular legislation cannot pass. If it passes it's a win for the governing party. If it doesn't it gets held against the government party because they should be in control. If they cannot get it done it gets blamed on them bring weak. So why would the opposition allow passing even popular legislation? McConnell explained this very openly and clearly.
undefined1|4 years ago
paxys|4 years ago
2. Having zero spare votes (there is usually at least one Democrat senator, like Manchin, opposed to everything)
unknown|4 years ago
[deleted]
person_of_color|4 years ago
[deleted]
chenzhekl|4 years ago
Nbox9|4 years ago
wwweston|4 years ago
I don't really want it to be illegal, but as far as I can tell, the same thing that happens to cigarette smokers happens to weed smokers: perspective on the fact that smoking is the atmospheric equivalent of peeing in the pool is lost.
And I wake up like I did last night at 1:30am having had a neighbor opt me into the experience via my open window next to the patio. Yay, personal liberty.
I have zero problem with people choosing it for themselves, but please, figure out a way to keep it personal.
01100011|4 years ago
dumbfoundded|4 years ago
paxys|4 years ago
CardenB|4 years ago
jshawl|4 years ago