cannabisnews.com: MJ Decriminalization Struggles in the Legislature










  MJ Decriminalization Struggles in the Legislature

Posted by CN Staff on January 24, 2009 at 05:12:26 PT
By Dominic Holden 
Source: Stranger 

Washington State -- Twelve Democrats are cosponsoring a bill in the state house that would reduce the penalty for possessing up to 40 grams of marijuana to a civil infraction, subject to a $100 fine. It would only decriminalize marijuana possession, not legalize it. Introduced on January 14, this is the first legislative attempt to reform Washington's marijuana laws in decades. Under current state law, possessing even one joint is a misdemeanor punishable by up to 90 days in jail.
This seems an unlikely year for the legislature to embrace any civil-liberty-lovin' proposals, considering the top item on their agenda: bridging the state's $6 billion budget gap. However, the financial crisis may, paradoxically, prove a windfall. According to data from the Washington State Institute for Public Policy, the state would save $7.5 million a year by passing the law—a figure that's based on the 11,553 pot-possession arrests in Washington in 2007."I think any chances of passing will hinge on the opportunity to achieve budget savings and whether this proposal is less unpopular than other proposals for cost savings," says the bill's prime sponsor, Representative Dave Upthegrove (D-33). "Is it more controversial than closing parks?"Upthegrove also hopes that, as a suburban representative, he gives the bill "a little political cover."But the bill has already hit a roadblock. Representative Christopher Hurst (D-31), a former narcotics officer and ex-cop who chairs the Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Committee, refuses to give the bill a hearing. "I am concerned that [the bill] is in direct conflict with federal law," which makes possessing any quantity of marijuana a crime, he says. "If we tell citizens of Washington that marijuana is no longer a crime, and they cross the border and get arrested... or if they go out on their boat [and are arrested by the Coast Guard], they are not going to be happy with us."However, it's unclear whether the federal government would bother prosecuting people for such a minor crime. Even federal law-enforcement officers can treat possession of up to an ounce of marijuana as an infraction, rather than arresting and jailing an offender. And Representative Roger Goodman (D-45), an attorney and former head of the King County Bar Association's Drug Policy Project, says, "Federal law clearly allows the states to prescribe their own penalties, whether civil or criminal.""Thirteen other states have already [decriminalized marijuana]"—including Massachusetts, where a measure similar to the one in the Washington State legislature passed a public vote in November by a 30-point margin—"and we haven't seen any of those other states struggle with [the] problem" of federal prosecution, says Alison Holcomb, director of the ACLU of Washington's Drug Policy Project. California has made possession of marijuana a civil infraction, and, like Washington, it also sits on an international border and has a coastline patrolled by federal agents.Hurst says that if a companion bill passes in the state senate and comes to his committee, he will give it a hearing.State senator Jeanne Kohl-Welles (D-36) says she'll introduce companion legislation within a week. But the bill faces an uphill battle in the senate, where it will have to get out of the judiciary committee. Three of the committee's eight members are Republicans and another member is conservative Democrat James Hargrove (D-24).Meanwhile, no Republicans have cosponsored the current bill, making it a lefty long shot that could take years to pass, cosponsor Representative Brendan Williams (D-22, Olympia) acknowledges. Cal Anderson, Washington's first gay legislator, "used to be a voice in the wilderness on gay civil-rights issues," he says. "You just keep plugging away and people start thinking in terms of the change." Source: Stranger, The (Seattle, WA)Author: Dominic HoldenPublished: January 23, 2009Copyright: 2009 The StrangerContact: editor thestranger.comWebsite: http://www.thestranger.com/URL: http://drugsense.org/url/BAWKp6rACannabisNews -- Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help





Comment #27 posted by Vincent on February 01, 2009 at 11:50:47 PT:
Washington state decrim
Rep. Christopher Hurst is talking garbage--he doesn't care about potsmokers being treated unfairly by the Feds--all he cares about is what his Anti-drug, Neanderthal friends will think of him if he breaks one of their taboos.
  I also read, in this report, that the Republicans will not support decriminalization. Are you serious? Republicans supporting decriminalization?!! That's like "Pope Benedict the Unwise" becoming a diplomat! You know, the impossible dream.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by FoM on January 27, 2009 at 09:52:10 PT
House Bill SB 5615 
SB 5615  Reclassifying possession of forty grams or less of marijuana from a misdemeanor to a class 2 civil infraction.http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=5615&year=2009
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by westnyc on January 26, 2009 at 14:27:07 PT
I agree, the Patriot Act must go!!!
"This woman got 3 months in the gulag and the government stole her kids over a thrown drink and swearing."Hello! Though I strongly disagree with using the Patriot Act in this type of airline incident, I agree with the decision to punish this woman and to [temporarily] remove her children until the conclusion of a full [criminal] investigation into this matter. However, the media isn't reporting the full story, as usual, of what actually happened; and, "all" witnesses have backed-up the crew members account--this woman was severely abusive to these children and certainly interfered with crew orders and safety directives in place to accommodate hundreds of people packed like sardines in a small metal tube, sailing at 500mph, 40,000 feet above the world for hours. If you throw anything at a FAA certified crew member, you will go to jail! She broke the law; and, was arrested accordingly! I have an inside edge to this incident; but, for obvious reasons I'd prefer to not say!  Sadly, the matter in which the media and the public has treated airline crew members since September 11th is disgraceful; and, it should be remembered that flight-attendants have an incredibly important job to do--a job which has been destroyed since 911 with massive paycuts and furloughs, and loss of respect.  Flight attendants and other crew personnel are not waiters or clerks and should not be treated as such. They are highly trained individuals who exist to assist and to save lives; and, this is why you do not find vending machines on airplanes.  Flight Attendants were the second largest group of first responders to die on 911 and the first victim on that morning was also a flight attendant, who died by having her throat slashed behind a closed curtain. I know from watching the video of the landing in the Hudson last week, this unmentioned fact: the pilot landed the plane; but, the flight attendants kept panicked passengers from opening those doors in the aft galley which saved as many lives as the pilot who landed the plane. Sadly, flight attendants are viewed as peanut-pushers and not safety professionals who exist under FAA regulations--a vending machine cannot evacuate an aircraft or perform emergency resource management procedures. In this ditching, most would have died had this flight attendant (who suffered a severe cut) failed in her duties and opened these doors instead of redirecting panicked passengers toward the next available exit! Why? The plane would have flooded and dropped like a stone within seconds (it's made of metal); and, the massive rush of water would have prevented others from exiting via other exits--likely, most would have drowned.  How many fliers understand the proper use of inflationary lifevests and deployment in a ditching, or how to properly attach/detach the raft before the plane begins to sink? These examples name but a few of the many technicalities that every U.S flight attendant must know; and, it is something everyone who flies should understand. Most would be surprised to learn that the pilots rarely know these facts as evacuating isn't their main consideration in an emergency; and this is the reason the FAA requires certified flight attendants on commercial airlines. On behalf of the many in this profession, I just wanted someone to understand another side of the story as the stories of heroics always go to the captains and/or passengers. However, I agree with you and using the Patriot Act instead of the FAA Regulations already in place-is as silly as it is disgraceful!!! :-)
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #24 posted by John Tyler on January 25, 2009 at 16:24:00 PT
initiative process
“Representative Christopher Hurst (D-31), a former narcotics officer and ex-cop who chairs the Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Committee, refuses to give the bill a hearing.” This is why states need the initiative process to get around legislators who use their power to try to block important and needed legislative changes.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by FoM on January 25, 2009 at 11:13:19 PT
Sam
I hope so too.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by Sam Adams on January 25, 2009 at 10:42:56 PT
Patriot act
I hope Obama and the dems can find the integrity and willpower to repeal the Patriot Act.This woman got 3 months in the gulag and the government stole her kids over a thrown drink and swearing.I read stuff like this and I think about the Nazis and how many asked the Jews "why didn't you just leave in the 30's, couldn't you see what was happening?" If I was about to have kids I'd seriously consider Canada.http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2009/01/25/bad_behavior_on_flights_prosecutable_under_patriot_act/?page=full
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by Sam Adams on January 25, 2009 at 09:42:46 PT
Crock of Bullous
I don't know what Bullous disease is, but I sure do recognize Bullsh** when I see it!
[ Post Comment ]

 


Comment #20 posted by FoM on January 25, 2009 at 09:08:45 PT

Hope
I really try to be a kind person but I have a lot of fire in me and when I get set off people would clear the room quickly if that happened. People have said to me over the years that I am calm and reasonable but don't corner me. Our friends are really nice and honest. I don't march to the beat of other people's drums and I don't think we should. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #19 posted by Hope on January 25, 2009 at 08:59:15 PT

This isn't a game we play. This is real.
comment 14Serious as death.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #18 posted by runruff on January 25, 2009 at 08:45:27 PT

Chest congestion?
I would be a good study for chest congestion. I've smoked pot almost nonstop for 45 years. My latest full and intensive checkup was three weeks ago and the doctor, like every other doctor, says my lungs are clear and healthy. I can feel that my lungs work well and my oxygen is at 98%.I've read Chinese studies and conversations about Cannabis treatment for cleaning the lungs. We are familiar with the expectorate that smoking cannabis creates? This expectorant is easily expelled from our lungs while it adheres to foreign particles and takes them out with it.Critics apply tobacco mentality to cannabis research. 'just lazy science. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #17 posted by charmed quark on January 25, 2009 at 07:09:59 PT

NOT Chest Congestion
This is a rare lung disease that often has mild symptoms during its early stages. But the lungs are already severely compromised by the time these changes show up on imaging. It will often progress to COP/emphysema, and likely death by lung infection or lung failure without a lung transplant or radical surgery.BUT - this whole paper is based on observing TEN people with this condition who said they had smoked marijuana for greater than one year. They were much younger than the typical age this disease is found in chronic smokers or people exposed to toxic chemicals. So based on this the writers concluded that marijuana smoking greatly accelerates lung destruction.Nonsense, of course. I don't know why these people had this disease. Maybe it was the marijuana smoking combined with a rare genetic propensity, maybe (likely) something else. But it is really rare in people that age 41 years +/- 9 years), marijuana smoking or not. The authors seem to be implying all chronic marijuana smokers have a likelihood of this disease. Not likely.AFAIK, the main lung risk from chronic marijuana smoking, based on multiple reliable studies, is bronchitis.I don't think this is a good thing for your lungs - it can make your lungs less resistant to pneumonia, for instance. So heavy users should probably avoid smoking cannabis constantly and consider using a vaporizer or sublingual applications.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #16 posted by OverwhelmSam on January 25, 2009 at 04:54:49 PT

Side Note
The study didn't cite whether marijuana smokers also smoked cigarettes, but something seems fishy. In the final analysis, the way to avoid RAPID LUNG DESTRUCTION is simply do not hold your breath when you smoke. lol Thanks for the tip Professor, how much taxpayer money did you get from the ONDCP for this study?
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #15 posted by OverwhelmSam on January 25, 2009 at 04:48:17 PT

Marijuana Smokers Face Rapid Lung Destruction
Chest congestion, this is what they base their hysteria on, chest congestion. I think every regular marijuana user knows that smoking marijuana causes some chest congestion, I know it and I'm okay with it. In this study, lung function and x-rays are normal, but you may develop chronic chest congestion. Okay, if you smoke anything it will cause chest congestion and it's not deadly or debilitating, so what's the big deal? Is this the best they can due to expose the "dangers" of marijuana use and justify it's illegality? Inquiring minds want to know, NORML, MPP, anyone? http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080123104017.htm
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #14 posted by FoM on January 24, 2009 at 15:53:32 PT

Just a Note
I sent an e-mail to Matt Elrod. If the registration needs to be fixed I'm sure he will fix it. When people post on CNews we don't say things about one organization and something else about another organization. We went thru those problems years ago. It's called basic decency. Both organizations are what we have and we need them to do their thing. This isn't a game we play. This is real.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #13 posted by FoM on January 24, 2009 at 15:28:52 PT

Bodhii
I will have to contact Matt Elrod. You were blocked from posting because of complaining about NORML. Stirring trouble isn't what this site is about. This is a private forum.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #12 posted by FoM on January 24, 2009 at 15:24:57 PT

How Did You Get In Here To Post?
I didn't approve it.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #11 posted by Bodhii on January 24, 2009 at 15:10:12 PT:

Hey Admins, what gives?
Why did I have to register a new account to post? Was there something wrong with my old one? I tried emailing but kept getting blocked by the spam blocker. If it's alright, can I go back to simply Bodhi? Did I do something wrong?
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #10 posted by FoM on January 24, 2009 at 13:34:22 PT

charmed quark
I agree. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #9 posted by charmed quark on January 24, 2009 at 13:23:35 PT

x-police but now a legislator
Goodness knows, there are enough times when the police, who always say they just enforce the law and if you don't like it, change the law, then try to stop people from changing the law.But this guy IS a legislator now, so I don't think it is inappropriate that he comments on the bill.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #8 posted by FoM on January 24, 2009 at 12:37:05 PT

Hope
Something is terribly wrong with police or x police getting involved in this or any issue of importance. I believe once a police person always a police person in their way of thinking. What I mean is the mentality stays with them of controlling others.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #7 posted by Hope on January 24, 2009 at 12:32:05 PT

Hurst isn't a cop anymore.
But you're right. I'd always heard the same thing until these issues of challenging and changing their beloved prohibitions became an issue. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #6 posted by FoM on January 24, 2009 at 12:15:39 PT

A Big Question
When did it become ok for police to comment on policy issues? I thought we always heard "We don't make the laws we just enforce them. If you don't like the law the way it is change it."
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #5 posted by Hope on January 24, 2009 at 12:03:22 PT

Bogus. Ignorant. Condescending. Arrogant.
"If we tell citizens of Washington that marijuana is no longer a crime, and they cross the border and get arrested... or if they go out on their boat [and are arrested by the Coast Guard], they are not going to be happy with us.""Representative Christopher Hurst (D-31), a former narcotics officer and ex-cop who chairs the Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Committee, refuses to give the bill a hearing." They "refuse" to allow adult Americans to choose whether or not they want to use a plant that is, in fact, very beneficial, sometimes, even life saving, to many, many Americans? How dare they? Is it because he believes the rest of us, who disagree with him on this matter, vehemently, haven't got as much sense of right and wrong as he has? Is that what he and others like him think? How dare he? How dare they? How offensive! He believes other adults shouldn't be free to choose? Shouldn't be free? Again, I say, "How dare he?"He's got a perverted personal agenda that involves arresting, robbing, and degrading people for having an herb and he "refuses" to even consider the wishes of others he's actually supposed to "represent" in the matter.... at all? I suspect these prohibition loving people don't dreadfully and unnaturally fear the cannabis plant like they pretend, at all. Our problem with changing these unjust laws is that they, the people who resist these positive changes, actually love these barbaric and unjust laws against cannabis and it's use, so that they can persecute, and enjoy that persecution in so many ways, those they like to look down on. They, people like Hurst, are indeed, I think, "possessed" by a truly evil, cruel, and ignorant "spirit". Their attitude (spirit) is bad (evil) and they have harmed so many people... so unreasonably and unjustly.Anti-cannabis laws are Hate Crimes.Get your jack boot off the neck of Americans, Hurst! Now!
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #4 posted by ripit on January 24, 2009 at 08:11:31 PT

no suprise here is there?
a former narcotics officer and ex-cop the first roadblock.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #3 posted by FoM on January 24, 2009 at 06:48:05 PT

Sam
I think many programs will be trimmed. If they won't have the money to waste they will give up a lot easier. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #2 posted by Sam Adams on January 24, 2009 at 06:39:41 PT

financial crisis, right
We are so wealthy in this country. The resistance to a simple, common-sense measure like this, that is supported by 2/3rd of the population, just shows how totally corrupt our state and federal govts have become. We could save trillions if we seriously cut back on non-essential government BS.They'd rather just print more money off than cut back any of the MASSIVE bureaucracies and useless laws like the MJ laws.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #1 posted by FoM on January 24, 2009 at 06:03:22 PT

A Good Beginning I Think
Excerpt: Twelve Democrats are cosponsoring a bill in the state house that would reduce the penalty for possessing up to 40 grams of marijuana to a civil infraction, subject to a $100 fine.
[ Post Comment ]





  Post Comment