Christopher Ingraham writes in the Washington Post that many countries are taking a close look at what's happening in Colorado and Washington state to learn lessons that can be applied to their own situations and so far, the news coming out of Colorado and Washington is overwhelmingly positive. Dire consequences predicted by reform opponents have failed to materialize. If anything, societal and economic indicators are moving in a positive direction post-legalization. Colorado marijuana tax revenues for fiscal year 2014-2015 are on track to surpass projections.
Lisa Sanchez, a program manager at México Unido Contra la Delincuencia, a Mexican non-profit devoted to promoting "security, legality and justice", underscored how legalization efforts in the U.S. are having powerful ripple effects across the globe: events in Colorado and Washington have "created political space for Latin American countries to have a real debate [about drug policy]". She noted that motivations for reform in Latin America are somewhat different than U.S. motivations - one main driver is a need to address the epidemic of violence on those countries that is fuelled directly by prohibitionist drug war policies. Mexico's president has given signs he's open to changes in that country's marijuana laws to help combat cartel violence. Sandeep Chawla, former deputy director of the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime, notes that one of the main obstacles to meaningful reform is layers of entrenched drug control bureaucracies at the international and national levels - just in the U.S., think of the DEA, ONDCP and NIDA, among others - for whom a relaxation of drug control laws represents an undermining of their reason for existence: "if you create a bureaucracy to solve a particular problem, when the problem is solved that bureaucracy is out of a job".
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday October 21 2014, @09:10PM
If I were either Big Pharma or Tobacco, I'd be looking to encourage independent growers and suppliers (obviously they're not going to take that on any more than they grow all their current ingredients and crops). Growers would have a steady wholesale market on a contract basis, which is always preferable from a cashflow standpoint to a variable market that depends on people coming to your door. I fail to see any business downsides for anyone, even with lots of homegrown competition -- those will be their future suppliers once they discover the joys of a regular paycheck and getting your mortgage paid off early (in fact I know of two people who did just that, growing for the bulk wholesale market, NOT to local buyers).
Anyway, the corporate world can't be blind to the fact that marijuana is California's #1 cash crop, and was so long before it became even quasi-legal. Might be they're trying to play their cards too close to the vest, just in case the whole thing doesn't pan out legally.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by velex on Tuesday October 21 2014, @10:31PM
Might be they're trying to play their cards too close to the vest, just in case the whole thing doesn't pan out legally.
Good call. Getting involved too early might be a PR disaster if legalization stalls or if we even see states that experiment with it, then reinstate prohibition.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday October 21 2014, @11:05PM
Yep, and then guess who looks like the bad guys. My guess is they'll wait for federal approval.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.