SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The State of Washington's Attorney General says he will resist federal efforts to undermine his state's legalized cannabis laws:
With White House press secretary Sean Spicer suggesting Thursday that the Trump administration would crack down on states that have legal recreational marijuana, Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson vowed to defend Washington state's legal pot law. "I will resist any efforts by the Trump administration to undermine the will of the voters in Washington state," Ferguson said in an interview. Spicer said during a press briefing Thursday that the issue rests with the Justice Department. But he said, "I do believe that you'll see greater enforcement of it."
[...] Ferguson and Gov. Jay Inslee sent a letter to U.S. attorney general Jeff Sessions, dated Feb. 15 that laid out arguments for Washington's state-regulated pot industry. They said illegal dealing is being displaced by a tightly regulated industry that is projected to pay $272 million in taxes this fiscal year. That frees up law-enforcement officers to protect communities facing more pressing threats. They also noted that legal pot entrepreneurs must undergo criminal and financial background checks.
California's Attorney General is also on board:
"Until we see any sort of formal plan from the federal government, it's full speed ahead for us," said Alex Traverso, a spokesman for the California Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation. In Congress, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Costa Mesa) plans to introduce legislation that could blunt Spicer's threat by preventing the Department of Justice from enforcing federal laws against the recreational use of marijuana in states that have legalized it, a spokesman said Friday. [...] California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra says he is ready to safeguard the rights of the 56% of voters who approved Proposition 64, which allows California adults to possess, transport and buy up to an ounce of marijuana for recreational use.
In other weed news, make sure to check your weed bales for nukes.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 25 2017, @10:17PM
The trustee model falls down on the reality that if they fail to act like delegates, they can be voted out of office.
I mean, I suppose you could go and ask all the people who feel betrayed, and are consequently angry, to trust that their representatives will totally do what's best for them, and totally not be corrupt, and will totally only walk back their campaign promises if they really, really feel that they have to - but alas, that's not been the observed track record, has it? In fact, corruption, dressed up in various forms, is practically the de facto norm in Congress.
So, yeah, if we need a trustee model, you need to find incentives that align with that model. Until then, the delegate reality holds sway.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anal Pumpernickel on Saturday February 25 2017, @11:32PM
The trustee model falls down on the reality that if they fail to act like delegates, they can be voted out of office.
They can be, but they aren't. Our so-called 'representatives' are utterly failing to represent us in any meaningful way, and yet many of stunningly high reelection rates.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 26 2017, @02:19AM
Except that that is precisely, exactly, literally what the Tea Partiers said that they would do, and did do.
Don't you remember all the interviews of them saying they were going RINO-hunting? And how the democrats were oh-so-happy that strong centrist republicans were getting nailed by scrappy tea party challengers that had no chance of winning (except that some of them did)?
And now many commentators on the left are suggesting that this is what the Berners should do, to make their voices heard as the Herbal Tea Party, because that's why the Tea Party now have a voice, and the Occupiers basically don't.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday February 27 2017, @09:00AM
Except that that is precisely, exactly, literally what the Tea Partiers said that they would do, and did do.
Which isn't typical, and many of the people they voted in still don't represent them in any meaningful way. Last I checked, Congresspeople had something like a 90% reelection rate.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 27 2017, @04:14PM
Yes. You're right. Let's break that down a little.
First, the Tea Party made a positive demonstration that elected representatives respond, quite strongly, to the prospect of being replaced in the next election. The real win for the Tea Party wasn't the few people they elected, or removed. It was all the others that started taking them very seriously.
Next, the Tea Party also demonstrated as a consequence of the above that this strategy works. Scaring politicians with: "We can and will replace you." really does work. This argument really resonates with people who want more responsiveness from their representatives, hence the call for a Herbal Tea Party.
Even if there was a silent consensus (ignoring a few half-drunk angry sumbitches who pound the bar between boilermakers) that the trustee model was the right way to go, that consensus is now over. The folks in office abused it for so long that it's no longer credible.
Result: any hope of restoring a trustee model will have to wait on the creation of incentives for members of Congress to behave accordingly.