Marijuana legalization predicted to fail in November

April 10, 2010

California voters get to decide in November whether or not to legalize marijuana, but political pundits are already warning that the measure could go up in smoke. [San Bernardino Sun]

Early polls show support for the proposed legalization, but experts say that November is a long ways off, and much could change.

“Law enforcement will come out against it very strongly,” said Jack Pitney, political science professor at Claremont McKenna College. “We’ll see a lot of messages tying marijuana use to harder drug use . . . Opponents will also suggest that it will now be easier for young people to have access.”

Also, according to Pitney, voters in mid-term elections tend to be older and more conservative–two strikes against marijuana legalization.

Another factor will be Jerry Brown, expected to be on the November ballot as a candidate for governor. In his first go-round in Sacramento, Brown signed a bill lessening penalties for marijuana. However, as California Attorney General, Brown recently came out against legalizing pot.


“according to Pitney, voters in mid-term elections tend to be older and more conservative–two strikes against marijuana legalization.”

While thats definetly true, older people do tend to be a larger part of the voting population durring a midterm election, it should be noted that most mid term elections dont carry initiatives that would bring out the youth quite the same way making pot legal might. I think the democratic base might show up.

I think it should also be mentioned that conventional wisdom tells us that older voters are more conservative but thats the old older generation the new older generation is increasingly being made up of the kids who took part in the summer of love. People my age (mid 30’s) think of the older generation being the old conservative WWII vet archetype but a lot of those guys are dead and gone now.


Beware of the pundit who puts the weight of conventional wisdom behind his/her projections

Concerned Parent

Citzens of California can register to vote at w w w . by completing the online form and mailing it to the address on the form.

Hopefully Californians will be prepared for the “October Surprise” that the prohibitionists will pull out of the hat as November approaches. They will no doubt try some late-breaking scare tactics and continue to ignore the harm caused by putting our young people in prison, the loss of tax revenue, the waste of tax money, the huge cost of enforcement, and all of the other evils of prohibition.

Parents, let’s watch out for the “October Surprise” and let’s stop putting our own kids in jail!


I agree that we have to STOP putting our kids in jail over a bunch of prohibitionist that have fallen prey to a lot of propaganda. Young people are ending up with criminal records that follow them all their lives. They end up exempt from being allowed to qualify for gov college loans. They have to disclose their backgrounds when applying for jobs. Too many people have become victims of a system that is more about creating more LEO than about serving it’s people. It’s none of anyone’s business what we put in our bodies particularly something like marijuana. VOTE YES and legalize it.


Just weighing in, I will vote yes. I don’t smoke it , I tried it many times and it made me tired not to mention that I laughed at things that I can’t recall were necessarily funny. I see a much larger problem in keeping this from the people rather than letting them enjoy some harmless laughs. I definitely see it’s medicinal properties, I believe that we could all use a few laughs if nothing else. Any revenues that feed and fatten the pork (government) are better than taking it out of our hides. I believe this is what it has come to.


I don’t use the stuff, never even tried it. I will vote YES. I’ve never known a pot head that was a problem to any of us but I have seen them pull off some complex calculations at a 100% efficiency and solve some major high tech brick wall anomalies after having a smoke. Can’t explain it but I have seen it. Cannibus

users are harmless, our jails should be incarcerating individuals that are a danger to our society, this is not true of those who are involved with this “herb” (I agree it is a harmless herb).


I will be voting for legalization to legalize marijuana. I agree that the people who use marijuana are harmless. These people are our neighbors, our co-workers , attorneys, accountants, judges I even know of some police officers that smoke it.

I want to add that BTDT is correct about property forfeiture and the reason that growers started using Federal lands. The forfeiture laws were so lucrative that our government decided to extend those laws to including any personal asset that was used in the commission of a crime. This lead to seizing a persons vehicle for agreeing to pay a prostitute $20.00. We were obviously asleep when that bill was passed. How many other bills are being passed while we stand by idly and continue to relinquish our rights as the citizens who are supporting this gestapo style government who retire at 50 with a six digit income for life? I hope we all wake up before our government picks our bones clean.


Sorry, I meant legislation to legalize.


I will also be supporting the legalization of marijuana. As a moderate I believe this is in the best interest of the people and like BTDT I don’t smoke it. Perhaps the tide is changing where LEO stand on this issue but my experience has been that the majority oppose it. I personally feel that it has more to do with the big $$$ LE receive from the Fed to operate their Narcotic Task Forces. With all the meth around I should think the NTF will still have plenty to keep them busy. Regardless, I expect to hear lots of propaganda about how it is dangerous and leads to harder drugs. I say pot has nothing to do with hard core drugs or the use or even experimentation with meth , heroin and the like. Here comes the tax revenue we all need from Central and Northern California’s #1 cash crop. Good Bye Mexican Drug Lords, Go back home cartels, this commodity is ours.


I should add that I grew around around many people who smoked pot and still know many people who use it. None of those people that I know or knew ever used harder drugs. In fact most don’t like or drink alcohol and some even quit smoking cigarettes by relaxing with a joint.


Cindy you got me remembering a law that was either put into effect at the state or fed. level about 15 years ago in regards to your comment about the big $$$.

It stated that any money or properity seized in the involvement of drugs would have any and all of that money go into law enforcement for the future (i.e. buying tactical equipment etc.)

That is the reason why at that time (and since) growing EXPLODED on federal land. People figured that way they only lost a cash crop and not their properity. Anybody doubting this look it up.


BTDT- That law is still in effect at both the state and federal level. It’s big money and the state of CA. along with many others are very fast to seize a persons vehicle for transporting marijuana. The feds usually consider a persons legal revenue before they seize assets. It is supposed to be about only seizing property and assets that were acquired through illegal means but the states have made a habit of grabbing whatever they can regardless of how it was acquired.

60 Minutes ran program a few years back that made me want to barf. It was about a pocket of LE located somewhere near the mid west that was stopping citizens driving out of state high value vehicles and seizing them for suspicion. They would keep the cars for weeks and then claim that they believed to have found hidden compartments for the transport of narcotics (no narcotics just a possible hiding place). I know it’s hard to believe and you would have seen the show and all the upstanding old people who this had happened with to believe it . These people were having to retain attorneys and fight to retrieve their vehicles. Many people lost their cars because they had to acquire other means of transportation, travel out of state for hearings, attorney fees and you get the picture. The money was going to the LE division that was perpetrating these crimes upon the citizens and 60 minutes followed them around (undercover) and video taped them on lavish ski vacations all compliments of the “bonus’s” they were raking in. In the end 60 minutes set them up and drove down the 30 mile corridor (state highway) with a new Cadillac. They got stopped for doing nothing but driving at the speed limit and caught the whole scam on hidden camera. It was sickening. Don’t know what came of those criminals with the badges and guns. I know the above story is a rare occurrence but yes, forfeiture of ones hard earned as well as ill gotten assets is alive and well in the USA.



In the 1960 was a felony.

Washingtom and all states taxed the people to build more prisons and enforce this law.

People at that time rumored that it was a crime because the government could not tax it.

In the 1970 was a misdemenor.

Washingtom and all states taxed the people to build more jails and enforce this law

People at that time rumored that it was a crime because the government could not tax it.

In the 1980 less than one ounce was an infraction.

Washingtom and all states taxed the people to hire more prosecutors and enforce this law.

People at that time rumored that it was a crime because the government could not tax it.

In 2010 Marijuana will be a regulated and taxable substance for revenue, failure to comply with parameters is a crime.

Washingtom and all states will continue to tax the people to regulate and enforce this new law.

People will rumored that the proposition will be twisted and changed so that the government can cheat the people more, like they did with the California Lottery and everything else.


I’m with willie on this one. Just read an article yesterday, talking about the fact the many ex law enforcement officers and judges support it!! The reason is as they see it, that many of the people who are smoking pot are normally law abiding citizens that like to imbib with some smoke, just as someone does with a glass of wine or beer. So WHY do we glog are system in the courts and are cops inforceing (at GREAT expence may I say) the law against a large group that is pretty much harmless.

I, as a conservative, am voting for this measure. I have wanted this done for twenty years for the reasons above. It’s Economics people!! I am tired of wasting my money to bust my neighbor. He is NOT a threat to you or me. Oh and for disclosure, yes I am as stated before ex user years ago but not now. Again Economics is why I support. Not for personnel reasons.



Why would law enforcement strongly come out against it?

Law enforcement only care about the letter of the state law and local ordinance.

The bill will pass.

The politician are prepared to add supplemental laws when they have an excuss for more revenue.


Law enforcement as well as the PIC will come out against it as it provides their main excuse for increased funding. Difficult to imprison 2.3 million people without an easy excuse.

Results don’t matter, if they did we would be decriminalizing all drugs.