I Have Seen the Future of US Politics & Its Name is Prop 19

By Al Giordano

Throughout the 2008 presidential primaries and election I frequently cited polls by SurveyUSA, or SUSA, as the ones that best helped me to be able to pick the winner in 51 out of 55 primary contests and 51 out of 54 Electoral College entities in November. I don’t know if SUSA provided the most accurate polling or not, but I consider their reports to be the most detailed and transparent, with plenty of demographic data to extract with which to be able to see the deeper currents and undertows beneath the up-and-down horse race numbers.

SUSA’s poll results this week showing a narrow (48 to 44 percent) lead for California’s Proposition 19 – to legalize and tax marijuana – actually reveals more of a mixed bag for the referendum’s proponents than many presume, and I’ll explain exactly what is going on in a moment, but first I wanted to draw attention to something the pollsters wrote in their own analysis: That some Democratic party candidates in California – we’re lookin’ at you Senator Barbara Boxer – are going to win or lose based on whether Proposition 19 pulls enough infrequent voters to the polls. And this is paradoxical because Boxer is among the many Democrats who have voiced opposition to Prop 19, and the lessons that come out of November 2 will ring her bell and go all the way up to the White House and into the 2012 election cycle.

SUSA titles its analysis,  “Some Evidence That California's Marijuana Tail is Wagging Barbara Boxer's Dog; Voters Without Home Phones, Voters Focused on Decriminalization, May Tip Senate.” In sum, the pollsters have identified the key factor in Boxer’s contest vs. Republican Carly Fiorina, who leads narrowly with 46 percent over 44 percent for the incumbent. By looking separately at voters who only use cell phones, those who have both cell and home phones, and those only with home telephones, SUSA has found significant differences in the voting intentions of the cell phone-only citizens and the rest. It is no secret to young people (of all ages) who use cell phones exclusively that they are culturally distinct from land liners in ways that extend beyond hardware preferences.

Nomadic, and on the move, more reliant on the Internet than the television for their news intake, they’re the future of the United States. And they’re also a lot more multi-racial – and more actively defy societal apartheids - than the rest of the population. OMG! Wait… wait… see that little light bulb popping on over our heads? By Jove, I think we get it! Those are the 2008 first time Obama voters, duh! And getting them to vote in the midterm elections is the biggest headache that the White House and the Democratic party has right now leading up to November 2.

But it is less of a headache in California this year, precisely because Proposition 19 is on the ballot. And not only because many youngsters want cheaper, cleaner and safer access to marijuana: Younger African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans and others who don’t smoke pot at all but have grown up with the experience of being hassled by police and searched “for drugs” know first hand that the drug war is a cruel scam that is, at least in part, intended to keep them down and put them in prison and on parole. It puts them at a disadvantage in the competition for jobs and careers and opens them to more discrimination in every realm of life. They know that white folks use most of the drugs, but they and their family members are the ones being sent to jail for it. Before we look at age and race as factors in the upcoming vote, let’s first look at the voter tendencies among cell phone users vs. land liners:

As you can see, 62 percent of those who exclusively use cell phones (labeled "CPO, liv") will vote to legalize and tax marijuana while only 29 percent oppose it. They’re just seven percent of the potential electorate, but whether they vote or not makes them the proverbial “swing voters” of 2010, and not just in California.

Now lets look at preferences by age (and, yes, I’m getting to the lesson for everyone in US politics, but especially for Democrats, before these words are done) and by race:

As you can see, among California “hippies” (ha ha, have a sense of humor, Gramps), the 50-64 age group, marijuana legalization enjoys a 48 percent to 40 percent lead, but it’s among voters under the age of 34 where Proposition 19 gets the margin of victory it needs to push it over the top: 59 percent of those voters favor the ballot question to just 33 percent against. Elderly folks are the biggest obstacle for the referendum, with 57 percent against to just 37 percent in favor.

Meanwhile, all racial groups – white, black, Hispanic – except,  according to this poll, for Asian-Americans (and at 12 percent of the survey – about 73 respondents – that stat is likely from a survey sample not large enough to get an accurate reading) favor Prop 19, with the highest margin of victory among Hispanic Californians. Since demographically they are younger than the rest of the population, I would venture that age has at least as much to do with that result as race does. Those numbers also confirm something I’ve talked to the organizers of Prop 19 about since the effort began: That they must avoid making the same mistake as opponents of Proposition 8 (the illegal ban on gay marriage)  in 2008 did: that Prop 19 needed a much more aggressive community organizing and field campaign among blacks and Hispanics. These numbers, and the moves I’ve watched them make over the past year, indicate that they are aggressively campaigning across all racial lines. And if Proposition 19 wins, that will be the number one reason why it triumphed.

Now, onto some more interesting numbers from the same SUSA survey, which bring us back to the larger question-of-the-month in all United States politics and elections:

Most Democrats and Independents favor marijuana legalization. Most Republicans oppose it. Most moderates and liberals favor Prop 19. Most conservatives oppose it. Most people who dislike the “Tea Party” will vote yes, while most who like it (and a smaller group, noted) will vote no. It doesn’t take a degree in rocket science or in polling to see the overlap between Proposition 19’s constituency and that of the Democratic Party and its future.

It is on this point that SurveyUSA mines the data and states what ought to be obvious. “Much learning out of California,” they note, with considerable understatement:

United States Senator Barbara Boxer,Democrat, nominally trails Republican Carly Fiorina among California likely voters interviewed on their home telephones, but, among voters who do not have a home telephone, and who were interviewed by SurveyUSA on their cellphone, Boxer leads 2:1. When the two groups are proportionally blended, SurveyUSA pegs it as Boxer 46%, Fiorina 44%, very much within the survey's theoretical margin of sampling error, and still too close to call, but indicative of how important voters without home phones are if Boxer is to hold her Senate seat, and, as fate may have it, if Democrats are to keep majority control of the United States Senate.”

Then, the pollsters ask aloud: “What's the Tail and What's the Dog Here?” Well, well... guess which dog is soon going to finally have its day:

“SurveyUSA includes a question designed to see if those who rarely vote in congressional elections, but who tell SurveyUSA they are uniquely motivatedto vote in 2010, are voting Republican. One theory underlying much of the 2010 campaign narrative is that Republicans are uniquely motivated, Democrats uniquely dispirited. In other geographies, this question produces expected learning: uniquely motivated 2010 voters are in fact more Republican than habitual midterm voters.

“In California, the opposite. Uniquely motivated 2010 voters are more Democratic, turning a 4-point Democratic advantage among habitual voters in the race for Governor into the 7-point Democratic advantage that SurveyUSA reports here; turning a 2-point Democratic advantage among habitual voters in the Lieutenant Governor's contest into the 6-point Democratic advantage SurveyUSA reports here, and turning a 2-point advantage for "Yes" on marijuana into the 4-point "Yes" advantage that SurveyUSA reports here. But in the Senate contest: the incumbent Democrat trailsby 4 points among habitual voters, and nominally leads by the 2 points that SurveyUSA reports here only when these uniquely motivated voters are included….”

And here comes the money quote:

“Subject to the limitations of a small sample size, the data may suggest that what is uniquely motivating Californians is marijuana. Uniquely motivated voters vote 7:4 to decriminalize marijuana. The even smaller subset of uniquely motivated voters interviewed on a cellphone is voting 12:1 ‘Yes’ on marijuana. Are the ‘Yes’ on marijuana voters the tail wagging Barbara Boxer's dog?This is more plausible to SurveyUSA than the reverse, which would be that 3-term incumbent Boxer has a unique tractor-beam in 2010 that is drawing to the polls otherwise disaffected voters who just happen to be pushing Proposition 19 over the top.”

(Emphasis in bold text added by The Field.)

Interestingly enough, Boxer opposes Proposition 19. So does former and future Governor Jerry Brown (considering that his nickname back in the seventies and eighties was “Governor Moonbeam” for his Zen proclivities, it’s disappointing to watch his anti-Prop 19 charade with a straight face). And when I see Attorney General Eric Holder and drug czar Gil Kerlikowske embarrass themselves with anti-Prop 19 posturing – given that the data shows that highly motivated Prop 19 supporters are the Democrats’ only ace left to save the California senate seat, and what that implies for the rest of the country in 2012 – I have to wonder aloud whether this is the usual fear-motivated political posturing on the part of these Democrats or a more calculated strategy to hope Prop 19 loses narrowly in order to have it on the ballot again two years from now and bring the new “swing voter” back to the ballot box again. If that is the hidden agenda, it is a risky one, not one that I would recommend, because if Prop 19 goes down this year there are going to be a lot of pissed off reform votes out there, some of whom remember when the words "tea party" had other connotations.

Already there is talk in high Democratic Party circles of seeding many state ballots with marijuana legalization referenda in 2012 to boost turnout of these cell phone voters. It's about time the Democrats had a great "wedge issue" in the culture wars, and Prop 19 is introducing it to the nation. What these numbers out of California are demonstrating is that had that been done this year in more key states, Democrats would not be in such high danger of losing the US House of Representatives. Outside of California, these cell phone-toting mobile voters are not likely to vote in such high numbers, and that will make the difference between defeat and victory in many Congressional districts and some Senate seats, too. Campaign managers, Democratic National Committeepersons, political consultants and Organizing for America operatives are pulling their hair out in 49 states of the union trying to drag unmotivated voters to the polls. Prop 19 – whether it wins or loses – is now Senator Boxer’s only hope of reelection. Because she sure ain’t motivating this emerging force in US politics we’ll call cell phone voters, even if most of those that do vote will hold their noses and pull a lever for her.

Here is, also, a word of caution to Proposition 19 proponents and drug policy reformers nationwide who are reading the polls too optimistically and counting their votes before they are cast: The SUSA poll, while it shows the “yes” vote in a narrow lead, also reveals some weaknesses for the referendum’s chances. Among those Californians who had already voted – a whopping 19 percent of the projected electorate – Proposition 19 is losing with 47 percent to 50 percent against it. Thus, it is an open question just how "motivated" Prop 19 supporters will be over the next ten days.

The highest undecided groups are African-Americans (16 percent undecided), people 50-64 (probably some tea partiers in that group, too) and women (12 percent). There is probably considerable overlap in those three groups, too: a large number of African-American women over fifty years old, and women in general over 50, are the most uncertain constituencies here, and Prop 19 proponents need an aggressive final push over the next ten days to convince them. They also need an Obama ’08 style Get Out the Vote (GOTV) ground game to actually get the cell phone voters to vote on and before November 2. In the early balloting, they haven’t done that job well enough yet. The good news is, that Organizing for America - the 2010 version of the 2008 Obama field organization - does have a GOTV army and will also be pulling the California cell phone voters by the ear, tantalizing them with Prop 19 on the ballot, no matter what the Attorney General or "drug czar" say from Washington. Cabinet members do not now, and never will, rule the ground. ¡Olé!

The best case scenario for Democrats, however, is not that Prop 19 loses and comes up again in California in 2012, but to the contrary: If the historic Proposition 19 passes, the pundits and talking heads that generate the misnamed “conventional wisdom” in the Washington DC beltway will be falling all over each other to note that Prop 19 won and it pulled Boxer out of the fire with it. If coming out of Election Night, Prop 19 emerges with the sheen of a  newly-minted winner, Democratic strategists will have little choice but to adopt a “50 state strategy” (especially in the 26 states - Maine, Massachusetts, and virtually everything west of the Mississippi River - that have citizen generated statewide ballot initiative processes), and go “all in” on legalizing, regulating and taxing marijuana, even if their politicians continue to balk at saying it aloud. And if you’re a Democratic (or Republican) politician that doesn’t yet see the writing on the wall, remember how most of you were wrong (or late) in your predictions two and three years ago, and that "Yes, We Can" means "Yes, We Cannabis," too.

Update: Prop 19 proponents continue to make the right moves (as recommended above). I just received an advisory that the NAACP and the Drug Policy Alliance are holding a press conference tomorrow in Oakland, featuring Alice Huffman, President, California NAACP State Conference, Stephen Gutwillig, State Director, Drug Policy Alliance, Major Neill Franklin, Executive Director, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, Danny Glover, Actor, Richard Lee, President, Oaksterdam University, Robert Rooks, Director, Criminal Justice, National NAACP and Dr. Jocelyn Elders, Former Surgeon General, to release a new report, “Arresting Blacks for Marijuana in California: Possession Arrests in 25 Cities, 2006-08.”

Not only is that a good campaign move, but it tells an important truth, too.

Comments

Obama Admin: No We Can't

Al, you come close but I think it's pretty important to explicitly point out that the young voters in California will come out for Prop 19 in direct opposition to the administration they elected two years ago. Obama, Boxer, Brown are all in the same camp - and Holder, acting for the President is on a whole other level. They're in the Democratic "enforce laws, go after kingpins, maybe not single out possession as much anymore" camp - which some find a bit mealy-mouthed.

During '08, tons of friends in the creative class (a hard self-identification for an Irish-Catholic from Yonkers to make) projected a pro-legalization stance on Obama even though he explicitly stated "I'm not somebody who believes in legalization of marijuana" and did the enforcement of laws, don't punish the the little guys Democratic dance.

I do think there's a real generational difference, which you're onto in this piece - it's not so much all the millennials want to get high unhassled, it's that they think it's no big deal and wonder why all the old folks (including the 49-year-old President) still think it is. Let's face it, Obama is still in a Prohibition and law enforcement mindset.

Things are not as they may seem...

I really don't think that Obama is necessarily against the re-legalization of Cannabis.  What I do think, is that he's taking this position on for political expediency.  The right wingers are hammering him on so many issues, and he doesn't want to add "drug legalizer" to the mix.   Maybe if he were a lame duck with no reelection worries, he might take a different position. 

We better pass this now, folks.  You can bet that the next Republican who becomes president will resume Bush's policy of busting collectives.  My, how people forget....

A point is being missed

I didn't write this to speculate on what the President really believes or not when it comes to drug policy reform, because conventional wisdom among almost all politicians is that it has been a "third rail" not to be touched.

Rather, I make a case above for why the time has now arrived when it can be touched without electrocution, and, to the contrary, it can be tapped as a power source of voter turnout!

Frankly, I don't think officials in Washington coming out against Prop 19 hurts its chances. It might well help convince some more conservative and tea-party types of the "hippie generation" to vote for it, frankly. It's not really outcome determinative one way or another.

Instead, I'm looking beyond November 2 at the dynamics to come. Because whether Prop 19 wins or loses this round, it will be back, and in more states, two years from now, a real force to be reckoned with in US politics.

That you guys immediately jump into - albeit with opposite conclusions - the "what does Obama think" angle, it just suggests that you missed my point altogether. Is that because I'm a lousy writer? Or maybe there's some careless or incomplete reading going on?

Pay attention. This is a big effing deal: a bona fide political freight train coming down the track. Get on board, get on board!

@AL

Yeah then we totally agree on the freight train, which, btw, also seriously extends to:

- Gay rights

- Immigration

- Budgettary discussions with regard to military spending

Look, there's serious research into this. The Pew stuff alone corroborates what you're saying, if read properly. I've actually done a fair amount of work in this area related to so-called social media - but it's not really about Twitter or Facebook or platforms. It's about the liberalization (small L) of the general polity.

P.S.

You're not a lousy writer - it was the graphic.

TW

PPS

I get the Springsteen reference as well - nice touch.

About 2012...

Thought I'd share the comment I wrote over at Balloon Juice:

I think Al is right about almost everything here except one thing – that this would be a good proposition to put on the ballot across the country. We’d have to pick the states very carefully based upon demographics, because we don’t want to motivate anti-cannabis voters.

For 2012 I’d recommend most of the West (Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Wyoming, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico) except for Utah, some of the midwest (North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois), and the Mid-Atlantic and New England (Maryland, Virginia, New Jersey, Delaware, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine) with the exceptions of West Virginia and Pennsylvania.

Basically I think the goal is avoid the South and Utah and/or places with lots of older voters (WV/PA/OH).  That still includes a lot of battleground states.  I don't know much about Hawaii.

Thomas Jefferson would be pro Prop 19

As I understand Prop 19, it would allow, if passed, local jurisdictions to opt-in or opt-out, which means once it passes, by necessity, it would require mass community organizing within California's municipalities to assure an opt-in to the legalization. Philosophically, I think that's the way to go with this in any kind of national roll-out since it makes it hard for opponents to advance an all-or-nothing canard. If they don't want legalization, they will have an equal opportunity within their communities like those who do to make their case, and democracy will win the day. 

But the bigger point is that it will almost assure a great mobilization of the people both leading up to and after a successful referendum vote, which once rolling, and sustained like that, will surely have an effect in our democratic institutions far beyond the issue at hand. It's very Jeffersonian in that sense, and he seems like the kind of "founding father" who would have been fine kicking back with a joint on his front porch.

 

Boardwalk Empire

For what it's worth, the HBO series "Boardwalk Empire" (which deals with the charming effects Prohibition had on the national life in the 1920s) premiered just as the Prop 19 campaign hit the national consciousness. I wonder if its success is an accurate measure of public opinion toward marijuana.

it is amazing to see

it is amazing to see so-called Democrats against legalization. Power politics abounds and control of the Money involved is what that is all about. the Prison/Police connection, along with the vast amount of money confiscated shows why the Republicans hate the idea of not being in control here. 

this is one of a few issues that could change the political landscape. get lots of new voters to the polls. that explains why the fight for the status quo has got some Democrats afraid of legalization winning. They will miss the wave that is the new set of voters. But like the Republicans, these Democrats like the present situation.  they are obviously reaping some rewards the way things are now. 

No 2012 redux

The idea that Obama will need to have Prop 19 on the California ballot in order to win California is absurd.  California is a reliably Democratic state at the presidential election.

Labor has been uniquely unstrategic in using marijuana as a base-motivator this year, neglecting signature collection for such a measure in Washington state.  Perhaps they are concerned that marijuana legalization measures are also likely to bring out libertarians who will vote Republican once they get to the polls (a distinct possibility in WA, where labor was mostly concerned with ballot initiatives concerning taxes this year).  Perhaps they are concerned about looking like they're friendly towards drug use.

My point is that the democratic establishment far beyond the Obama administration is driving against marijuana legalization measures, and I wouldn't hold out hope that they'll realize their strategic value in 2012.  OFA still assumes, and they may have data to back them- they usually do, that they'll be able to motivate the Democratic base and sporadic voting democrats (including first time 2008ers) just by having the President on the ballot.  

We made Prop 19 the topic

of one of our local Democratic Club meetings this fall.  (The state party stayed neutral on the initiative.)  We invited groups aligned on both sides of the issue, but the only one who attended was a representative of a law enforcement group in favor of legalization.

His presentation was effective, and many of the older club members seemed to take great comfort in hearing a law enforcement official make the case.

wikileaks and the election

pardon the OT, but Wikileaks Iraq docs will likely drop Monday Oct. 25.

Will this change the electoral landscape?

euro-presser at 10 am tomorrow.

Good Analysis

This is a great analysis, thanks for all the details.  I'm really hoping that Prop 19 passes, but I think that even if it fails to win in November, it has succeeded in letting the cat out of the bag.  Marijuana legalization is a seriously discussed issue now, with a seemingly inexorable public shift toward regulation over criminalization.  It's only a matter of time before the cannabis prohibition crumbles like the house of cards it is.

@Ben: The idea that Obama will need to have Prop 19 on the California ballot in order to win California is absurd.  California is a reliably Democratic state at the presidential election.

Sure, but what about the more contentious battleground states?  If Prop 19 helps get out the Democrat vote and pushes Boxer over the edge, there's a precedent for tilting polls toward Democrats behind marijuana legalization initiatives.  That might not be necessary in a presidential election for a state like California, but there are certainly going to be at least a few states that Democrats will need to win that are far from sure things.  Prop 19-ish referendums may just be the trick in some of those states.

Bill Maher

Bill Maher channeled but didn't mention your column this evening at the very end of his show, talking about marijuana legalization as the Dems perfect wedge issue.

tapping a source of power

"getting them to vote in the midterm elections is the biggest headache"

By analogy to cel phone users, Brooklyn's blacks have had lower turnout rates than Brooklyn's whites for many decades, despite their numbers.  Brooklyn's blacks are targeted for disproportionate enforcement and suffering by NYS's Rockefeller Drug Laws.  I'd like it if a few more NY politicians owed their jobs to this community, causing them to think twice about their indifference to or support of Rockefeller.

@BR No Initiative process in WI, MN, IL

Democrat for US Senate (Wisconsin 2012)

my 3 cents

I saw that alot of what was said was about political agenda and thank you for typing all that information, it was very enlightening. I don't really care who endorses getting marijuana legal, be it Republicans or Democrats, it's the right thing to do and someone needs to do it. For the sake of people doing time in prison for having mass quantitiy, the violence on the street, all that blood money made by people with wicked hearts profitting off of illegal pot sales, the list goes on. Did the government learn nothing from history and prohibition? Did they forget about Al Capone and the gruesome brutality that came from making alcohol illegal? Not to mention that pot is not nearly as impairing or dangerous as alcohol is, alcohol is just more socially acceptable (at least that's how it seems to me). Now, the government we have is all about saving face so why would they condone marijuana? They want to keep their seats of power and aren't nearly as concerned about reality and the safety and well being of everyone in general. It's been that way for years; I don't live in CA but I'd vote yes for Prop 19. If you want real change in this area then the people are the ones that are going to have to come out on top of the bureaucrats with passion for what is right strongly because it seems like our government cares more about looking good and staying wealthy than about what the people want unfortunately (thats how it looks anyway). I hope something good came from that rant, it was really just me venting ha.

Prop 19 and Conservatives...

I wonder if the pundits are WRONG as to whether Conservatives will vote AGAINST this measure.

 

The tea partiers are against excessive government regulation, taxes, and interference in our lives, particularly in our own homes.

I'm a Conservative and I voted absentee for the Proposition as I feel the government makes too many things illegal that shouldn't be and that the old canard that pot leads to harder drugs is so much bs & scare tactics.

When I smoked pot in the 1970's, all it did was make me hungry as hell.

Now if the government would legalize prostitution and keep their paws out of my poker playing on line as well. Our police agencies waste millions " enforcing " these kinds of laws. 

As an example, the SFPD's budget for the " vice squad " for the enforcement ( and far too frequent persecution of prostitutes, call girls and madams ) is $ 12 million a year. 

This in a city that is deeply in debt to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Remember the contract with America that said that the Republicans wanted government OUT of our lives ?

I wonder where THOSE Republicans are hiding out in California.

I also find ridiculous the assertion by MADD that we're going to see hordes of pot crazed drivers behind the wheel if this proposition passes.

That's the REAL reefer madness, IMHO.

 

A little off-topic...

Didn't realize this happened, but just saw that our friend Ron Fournier (sarcasm alert) is now at the National Journal, and in charge of it no less.  More here at this PR fluff piece posing a journalism in the NYTimes:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/25/business/media/25natjournal.html?_r=1&...

Wonder why they didn't interview Al for the piece?

The stenographer also says Politico is a "great success" without mentioning it is totally bankrolled by the Allbritton family (not too far removed from the Koch's, and don't believe their revenue claims...sort of like how Mitt Romney's book is flying off the shelves...not.)  Ron, the genius that he is, is re-inventing NJ as a bite-sized "breaking news" machine!  Just what we need more of, right?!?  And such an innovative idea too!

Fournier is a Repub operative through and through.  Remember this when they start popping up all over because of the PR company they hired.  Edward R. Murrow would be disgusted by cub reporter Ron, but Lee Atwater couldn't be more proud of Ron!

Make Fournier Fail.  Donate to the The Field today with that little button on the upper right of this page.

Treating others the way we want to be treated

 Jesus said, Whatsoeveryewouldthat men should do to you, doye even so to them. (Matthew 7:12).  

I know I would not want my child sent to jail with the sexual predators, or my aging parents to have their house confiscated and sold by the police, over a little marijuana. 

We can change the world when we vote.

I get the sense that a lot

I get the sense that a lot of people who should vote yes are going to vote No on this. There was a piece on NPR about it this morning but that's not the first such story I've heard. Dunno it it's pot-head paranoia, the work of some of the current player preferring the black market, or what. Nor do I know what impact it will have on 'down ballot' issues.

conservative for yes on 19

well FWIW, I consider myself a constitutional conservative and a supporter of the Tea Party movement and I will vote yes on 19 as will my wife who is politically like minded... I know I am just one small sample and probably not very representative but, well... I am not a party, or their whole platform and I do not walk in lockstep (I do not know the mind of other tea party people, they seem actually fairly libertarian on this issue from what I have read; some do at least)

I have not smoked regularly for over a decade and don't really plan on starting again.  Simply put, its just none of the governements damn business.

Prop 19

I was wondering if there was any coverage in the media in the US on the big marijuana bust in Tijuana last week. One report stated 105 tons of pot, another, 130 tons. I read about it in a Canadian MSM paper and in a few Central American papers. They burned the stuff last week-end. In my opinion, this story is an extra reason to support prop 19.

Cali Says "No We Can't."

Brown and Boxer won, but when it comes to Prop. 19 voters have apparently said "no we can't."

Look Who Voted Against Prop 19

Andrew Sullivan posted a readers comment.  Video, too!

Al knew this was coming. I can't put my finger on where I read his comments on this.  I just remember reading it.

Update:  Another post from Andrew from 11/05/10.  Amazing.

 

 

Add comment

Our Policy on Comment Submissions: Co-publishers of Narco News (which includes The Narcosphere and The Field) may post comments without moderation. A ll co-publishers comment under their real name, have contributed resources or volunteer labor to this project, have filled out this application and agreed to some simple guidelines about commenting.

Narco News has recently opened its comments section for submissions to moderated comments (that’s this box, here) by everybody else. More than 95 percent of all submitted comments are typically approved, because they are on-topic, coherent, don’t spread false claims or rumors, don’t gratuitously insult other commenters, and don’t engage in commerce, spam or otherwise hijack the thread. Narco News reserves the right to reject any comment for any reason, so, especially if you choose to comment anonymously, the burden is on you to make your comment interesting and relev ant. That said, as you can see, hundreds of comments are approved each week here. Good luck in your comment submission!

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

User login

Navigation

About Al Giordano

Biography

Publisher, Narco News.

Reporting on the United States at The Field.

RSS Feed