|
Chupe Raho Aurat posted:Do you work on a psych ward? I agree lets legislate based on what is appropriate for people in your psych ward What's your view on personal possession of tempera paint up to an ounce
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 13:16 |
|
|
General update, DC campaign is on the final run towards the 7 July turn-in. While not totally out of the woods, it's looking like we're generally on-target so should be on the ballot if we keep up the pace the last few weeks. Interestingly enough, I've seen just about no organized/public opposition to this measure in DC. I mean, there's always the handful of of bloggers/pundits that are saying it's a bad idea, and presumably there are DEA/FBI/etc folks that aren't keen, but I'm not seeing any clear "we must block this proposal" from any major public figure, nor any "Think of District Children" alarmist grassroots group. It's quite likely that those hostile to this are just waiting to see if it gets on the ballot before they commit to the fight, but it's only 120 days between the ballot deadline and the actual election, so that seems pretty short notice to mount an effective opposition. Meanwhile Oregon has collected over 100k signatures for their IP 53, of 83,000 valid needed. Full recreational for 21+, sales administered by Liquor Control Board, taxes $35/oz, polling Tuesday running 51% for, 41% against. Alaska turned in all their sigs in February, and are definitely on the November ballot. New York, Pennsylvania, Florida, Minnesota and Ohio appear to be making substantial progress on medical marijuana this year (with widely varying degrees of restriction). DC held a public hearing last week about widening our MMJ from "AIDs, cancer, and glaucoma only" to "anything where your doctor says it will help". Apparently strong public support for greatly widening the scope (and one witness who had a seizure at the actual event). Our usual councilmen, Wells and Grosso, made further strong statements for MMJ (and MJ in general): WaPo link A few more on-deck observations; standard disclaimers that canvassing involves judging people on sight, so inherently sounds discriminatory, and I fully realize that actual individual human beings vary from set boxes: I thought I'd be really clever and go to one of DC's many outdoor movie nights, catch folks on the way in and the way out to get sigs. I reckoned that such people would be a) almost totally local, since the region is big into outdoor movies and so it's not like you travel from out of state to go to one b) the kind of hipstery crowd that would tend to sign petitions to support weed. I actually ended up doing okay, but not at all due to the movie, but rather just because I was on the sidewalk outside the park in the 730-830pm time where foot traffic is good. Almost none of my signers were on their way to the movie, and after I watched the movie and dashed to the exit of the park to catch folks, only one or two signed out of a crowd of 200. I'm not sure to what degree it's because Ward 1 has a lot of canvassers so is getting tapped out, or whether movie nights draw the exact demographic of upper-middle class white people that don't care about local politics because they're personally doing fine. Apropos of the last point, I'd noticed a trend and several other canvassers agreed: wearing yoga pants is a high indicator for not signing and not taking an informational flyer. Seems a little counterintuitive, but our best guess was it's some combination of self-centeredness, contempt for labor (i.e. canvassers are beneath you), general xenophobia and avoidance of people outside one's social niche, and for male canvassers the assumption that all men are pursuing you. Not saying the last doesn't have some basis in valid social concerns, but we have very high participation from women in other demographics. For a similar counterintuitive: I think some folks had high hopes for the Pride Parade being a signature bonanza, which really wasn't the case at all. Some of that was predictable factors like lots of out-of-DC visitors, hard to petition a crowd during the parade itself (we focused on the crow build-up phase), people more focused on a different social issue (I got some good-natured chiding about "umm... wrong issue, wrong parade"). All that aside though, it's my personal canvassing perception that gay men are not strong signers for this issue. Again, canvassing is profiling, so clearly I'm going off of perception and certainly realize that not all gay guys are swishy, but going broadly off canvassing in gayborhoods, identifying people by t-shirts, events they're attending, apparent gay couples, etc. it's not a profile that makes me think "oh, there's some guys that are totally going to sign". For apparent lesbians, there's a slight positive trend, and markedly higher for lesbians of color. Black woman in her 20s with a double interlocked female sign tattoo (yes I literally see this occasionally canvassing): I'm definitely getting a sig. Slim swishy white guy in tight shorts walking around Dupont Circle: probably not a signature. Some of my most impressive negative reactions have been from a few exceptionally campy Latino men in my neighborhood, who full on struck an unironic "horror of horrors, keep it away from me" pose. So that's been interesting. Up there with "white woman in yoga pants" for near-uniformly zero reaction is conservative Asian-Americans. If it's a guy in khakis with a buttondown shirt and dour haircut, or a woman with a ponytail and below-knee skirt, sig rate is just about zero. If it's a Asian-American woman with facial piercings wearing cargo pants and a tank top, or AA guy in Chuck Taylors and skinny jeans, odds go back up to same as for white folks in similar demographic. I'm still only at around a dozen people who've had really strong negative reactions (not counting a non-political one of a guy who threatened me because I wouldn't let him "hold $10"). For whatever reason, the only two people who have full on screamed at me have been Latino men in the 30-40 range. One of those was while I was outside the movie night. Guy pulls up in his car and leans towards the passenger window, which people do all the time when they want me to throw them a flyer. I come up, and instead he shouts "you're going to hell!" at me. I gave the rebuttal "is it better to just keep arresting folks" but he kept cutting me off, and eventually peeled off literally hollering "you're going to hell!!!!" at me as he left. So that's me and canvassing. Got to go drop off this last week's small batch of signatures.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:General update, DC campaign is on the final run towards the 7 July turn-in. While not totally out of the woods, it's looking like we're generally on-target so should be on the ballot if we keep up the pace the last few weeks. Interestingly enough, I've seen just about no organized/public opposition to this measure in DC. I mean, there's always the handful of of bloggers/pundits that are saying it's a bad idea, and presumably there are DEA/FBI/etc folks that aren't keen, but I'm not seeing any clear "we must block this proposal" from any major public figure, nor any "Think of District Children" alarmist grassroots group. It's quite likely that those hostile to this are just waiting to see if it gets on the ballot before they commit to the fight, but it's only 120 days between the ballot deadline and the actual election, so that seems pretty short notice to mount an effective opposition. Thanks for the update - I was curious how this was going. Questions for you: 1) The "Expansion of MMJ" item - I saw some articles about this, and that all 13 councilmembers are signatories. So, I'm guessing this will pass. The article you posted said it would likely be voted on before July - would that then become a ballot item, or will it be like the Decrim, where it will pass, have the 60 day period, etc? 2) Does the amount of signatures gathered for Oregon's initiative mean that it will be on the November ballot? I'd heard about Alaska, but I hadn't heard anyone mentioning Oregon may be this year. 3) If you aren't able to get enough valid signatures by July 7th, does that mean that the count restarts for another effort? Or if you get all the signatures but on July 8th, it'll count, just for a special election at a later date? Is there a general timeframe for when the special election would be? SgtScruffy fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Jun 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
Call it cannabis #1. Marijuana is slang for Mexican tobacco.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
quote:Thanks for the update - I was curious how this was going. Questions for you: Digging into some answers here, back shortly. indoflaven posted:Call it cannabis #1. Marijuana is slang for Mexican tobacco. The local outfit is indeed called the "DC Cannabis Campaign", but I tend to use the word "marijuana" since it's the term most understood by the audience. Given that Pew surveys show that 7% of Mormons aren't aware that Joseph Smith was their founder, and nearly half of Catholics don't know transubstantiation is theoretically literal, I'd say it's a safe bet that 10%+ of weed users don't know the term "cannabis". And while that might help confuse some anti- folks, they'd probably get upset at us trying to "deceive" them, so most-known term is the easiest term. For the record, when I explain the campaign to Spanish speakers, I use the term mota instead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
I canvased a few weekends during CO. I just dreaded the clean cut white guy who wanted to sign but couldn't decide. After a certain point I just went- sign or move on. Couple went sorry. Couple others told me to gently caress off. But 60% signed. :tup:
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 07:45
|
|
|
For any interested in doing this that lives in Nevada: http://www.regulatemarijuanainnevada.org/join-the-coalition/ We need 100,000 signatures by November. I'm thinking about doing it. What is nice, they are willing to pay the signature gatherers $1.00 for every verifiable signature they can gather.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
SgtScruffy posted:Thanks for the update - I was curious how this was going. Questions for you: Definitely wouldn't be a ballot item, Council decisions are binding on their own (same as decrim didn't have to go to ballot), but as best I understand MMJ expansion would also be subject to standard 60-day Congressional oversight. I haven't seen it said explicitly, though one article noted But with bipartisan support on Capitol Hill now for looser medical marijuana laws, council members said they were confident that a broader law would pass muster with congressional overseers. quote:2) Does the amount of signatures gathered for Oregon's initiative mean that it will be on the November ballot? I'd heard about Alaska, but I hadn't heard anyone mentioning Oregon may be this year. The OR campaign has until 3 July to turn in their sigs. From what I gather from various blogs, they're well over 100k raw of 87k valid needed, and are continuing to canvass to build up a 25-30% buffer for validation. (link) quote:3) If you aren't able to get enough valid signatures by July 7th, does that mean that the count restarts for another effort? Or if you get all the signatures but on July 8th, it'll count, just for a special election at a later date? Is there a general timeframe for when the special election would be? I'm just a ground-guy, but my broad understanding is that we get 180 days for initiatives regardless, but if we don't get in our sigs 120(?) days prior to the general election it can't go in the general but would have to go to a special election. I'm not really clear on why it is that Alaska wanted to do a special election but had to settle for the November general, while in DC it's the opposite where we really want to get in the general. Not sure if it's a difference in strategy and the types of turnout expected, or if there are legal/financial aspects that make special elections a pain in DC. I had an interesting question from a bartender who'd just moved to DC, when he saw my campaign materials sitting on the bar while I had a beer. Well, his first question was how much an 8th cost, so I had to admit I had no idea since I don't smoke, but I did give him a promo pack of rolling papers. But among his other questions was whether weed being on the ballot this November was some political strategy for voter turnout, like gay marriage is in some purple states. So I explained that I really doubted it, given DC is almost literally a one-party state. DC has only ever had a Democrat mayor, though admittedly we've only have a mayor period since 1975 when we gained partial Home Rule. So yeah, while this initiative gets some interest and funding from larger national concerns on general principle of loosening drug laws, the actual impetus appears genuinely home-grown. Leader of the campaign is a long-time marijuana advocate and owner of a hemp store, and several of our councilmen have been pressing loosening marijuana laws. I'm optimistic that once this actually gets on the ballot we'll get some bandwagon effect with more fence-sitting DC pols diving in so they can say they had a hand in passing presumably popular and potentially inevitable legislation. Had last night only the second time someone has torn up a flyer in front of me. I was on my way to 7-11 around midnight to grab a Baja Blast to see what all the goony cult was about, saw a woman singing Gospel to herself with headphones on. Passed her a flyer, she took a look and started in "Oh, no no no, we don't need people out here all smoking up and getting stupid" and ripped up the flyer and threw it on the sidewalk. I replied "Or, you could not litter" but she ignored me. So that's two tear-uppers so far, and one where an Ethiopian immigrant woman gave the card to her 10yr old who ran and threw it in the trash while shouting "no marijuana!" I've had a few weird run-ins with kids, but I'm honestly surprised no parents (especially tourists) have marched up to give me a piece of their mind for exposing their child to the devil's lettuce on what was supposed to be a nice trip to DC to look at museums. I do occasionally wonder how many Very Important Talks have occurred due to kids seeing weed canvassers out. I have overheard a few kids asking their parents what I'm doing, but haven't heard any cool replies. If I'm somewhere where it's mainly kids, I'll turn my clipboard inward to hide the leaf since I'm not getting any sigs anyway and don't need some photo of me surrounded by kids going viral. Some other canvassers do that, especially the middle school age where kids are total pricks and we don't want to give them something to get all giggly about. Occasionally kids who are pretty clearly under 18 want me to give them a flyer, so I just tell them "you're not a voter". I don't personally think it'd be wrong for them to have a flyer, I just don't need parents calling the campaign to complain. I once had a pack of 6-8yr olds at a park come running up the fence to demand flyers (they had no idea, they just saw I was giving something away), and when I told them they're not old enough to vote, one pipes up "you can't talk to me that way!" The weirdest kid experience, I was in Chinatown canvassing. Good location, tons of foot traffic, not too many tourists but enough that I feel I'm adding to local color and giving them a story to tell when they get back to Kansas. I'm waving my clipboard and barking out "DC Voters! Legalize Marijuana This November! 71 on the Ballot!". I hear over my shoulder "Yay, marijuana!" I turn around and there's this little white kid, couldn't be older than 12, all yuppied up in polo shirt and deck shoes and whatever, almost assuredly a tourist kid. He was reaching for a flyer, so I yank all my gear back and say "sorry, you're not a voter", kid replies "well, okay... someday!" TapTheForwardAssist fucked around with this message at 15:59 on Jun 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
I'm limiting any statistical info to that which is publicly offered, so as not to be a leak, but here's some comforting numbers off our twitter yesterday:quote:DCMJ @DCMJ2014 · Jun 20 We require 22,300 valid, so if your valid rate is 50% or higher we're there already with 16 days left on the clock. So not a definite, but things are looking good, and we still have some collectors pressing, and more volunteers trickling in missing sheets. The problem is there's a good handful of vols who came in and got sheets, got 10-20 signatures and were too lazy or embarrassed to bring them in, so hopefully we can nudge them into bringing in their partials, both to plus our numbers a little, and to be fair to the voters who expected their signature to count. In sad-but-not-surprising news, Safer Arizona announced this month that they'd stopped petition canvassing, given that they were only a third of the way to 250,000 sigs required in July. But hey, that still helps sent a benchmark, get some initial identification of activists and canvassing strategy, etc. My impression to is that SA was pretty grassroots and going it alone, but they're working up a 2016 strategy that will actually involve a national-level org like Marijuana Policy Project next time, which should make life a lot easier: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/2014/06/17/arizona-group-ends-petition-effort-to-legalize-marijuana/10637825/ I've only chipped away at the story, but for anyone seriously interested in weed politics, it may be well-worth to study closely the frictions and entanglements happening with the campaigns in Oregon, and the post-game assessments after the November vote. OR seems to have really teetered on "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory" with some internal backfighting, and at one point this spring potentially three different competing voter initiatives. One died on the vine, one got its sigs and should announce enrollment on the ballot in the next few weeks, and one is staggering along and I doubt it'll make quota. UglyCrackBaby posted:For any interested in doing this that lives in Nevada: Great call, thanks for bringing it up! Canvassing can be tough, but if you can handle rejection and like dealing with people (or are a sperglord who would find it healthy to address your issues), it can be a lot of fun, expose you to a wide variety of people. If you or any other goons join, I'd love to see your experiences in the thread so we can keep this going, as I'll be losing out on canvassing stories after the next few weeks, though can still update the thread for political milestones in various campaigns, or for on-deck stories about GOTV and new voter registration. EDIT: Holy poo poo, Oklahoma is starting a legal weed petition now? Perhaps unsurprisingly it's based on the book of Genesis (not kidding), but hey a win is a win: http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/capi...afbe07444b.html TapTheForwardAssist fucked around with this message at 05:36 on Jun 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2014 03:42
|
|
|
Some of y'all may have seen that Rep Harris (R-MD) is trying to cock-block DC marijuana decrim/legalization: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/25/dc-marijuana-congress_n_5530059.html On Wednesday I put on a suit and a Marine combat regiment lapel pin and went down to the Congress offices to go speak my mind to everyone on the Appropriations Committee about how this was bullshit, that the Republican House members were being hypocritical about Small Government, etc. Going in on Friday to do the same in the Senate. Overall, DC wonks are reasonably confident this House malarkey won't get traction in the Senate, so annoyed but not unduly concerned. Overall this should be too late to prevent DC from limiting marijuana enforcement to a $25 ticket or less, but we do need to nip this in the bud to make sure it doesn't get through the Senate somehow and prevent November's full legalization. If you live in North/Eastern Maryland (details here) please call Harris and complain that this does not represent you. Those of y'all in other states, be at least minimally slactivist, check this list of Senators on the Appropriations committee and if any of them are in your state (odds are at least one is) call them and tell them that the "Harris Amendment in the House to the DC Appropriations Bill" is an unwarranted intrusion into DC's right to determine its own stance to marijuana law. Here's the list of other (mostly in conservative states) congressmen who backed the Harris Amendment: link. My overall hope is that this, while an annoying shot across our bow, will ultimately help rally pro-marijuana-reform voters and get them to hassle their reps to cut this junk out. I know a lot of folks don't believe that a call makes a difference, but on Wednesday when I was going to office to office, there was a real impact from congressional offices saying "man, we've been getting a lot of calls about this", so there's no harm in taking 30 seconds to see if your rep is on the list, google their phone#, and make a quick call to say "I'm a voter in your district/state and think it's inappropriate to prevent DC from reforming its marijuana laws".
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
Not to just emptyquote, but the article sums it up pretty cogently, and overall things are looking pretty positive as we prepare to hand in all our petitions for DC. I turned in my last sheets and gave back my clipboard today, a little sad that the canvassing is done, but looking forward to the next stage.Washington Post posted:Odds are increasing that D.C. will vote on legalizing marijuana — despite Congress  http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/odds-are-increasing-that-dc-will-vote-on-legalizing-pot-but-congress-a-wild-card/2014/06/29/96d5568c-fe13-11e3-932c-0a55b81f48ce_story.html posted:Organizers for Initiative 71, a measure that would fully legalize possession of marijuana in the District, plan to announce this week that they are closing in on 60,000 signatures — a comfortable buffer over the 22,600 needed to ensure the measure qualifies for the November ballot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
Going downtown to City Hall on Monday morning to be with the group as we hand in ~57,000 signatures. So unless we somehow have under 40% valid rate (we probably have 55-60%) we should be sitting pretty. Decriminalization should go into effect in the next couple weeks, and after that it's just us monitoring for any Congressional interference that might impede 71 being voted on in November. At one point in the past DC was allowed to vote on weed, but Congress blocked funding for counting the cast votes, real dick move. Cute tweet from DC Council after they broadcast a World Cup match on a big screen outside City Hall: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
 On Monday the DC Cannabis Campaign turned in 57,000 signatures (22,600 valid needed) to the Board of Elections. By mid next week they should have the valid number verified through partial sampling, and then a few weeks for anyone to raise a challenge. Fortunately, raising a challenge isn't simply "I don't like this, hold on for a second" but would entail having to actually present the BoE with a list showing line-by-line which entries you believe are invalid. So... good luck with that. I actually miss canvassing for petitions, though I'm still going around handing out flyers just to maintain awareness, plus our new flyers that are perforated into a number of small tear-off rectangles. Still having fun encounters and getting to meet all kinds of people. I was walking down by U Street today, chatting with some young voters and passing them the tear-off flyers, and saw some cop activity down the block. I wander by, still doing my hollering out "Vote 71 this November, Legalize Marijuana in DC!" and as I go by the guys the cops have cuffed shouts out "I'm with ya man, that's what I'm going to jail for!" I do get those too-too on the nose stdh.txt events occasionally, and get a lot of approval when I say to those watching "vote November and stop stuff like this from happening." Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland is still chest-pounding about how he's going to make sure DC's budget is modified to disallow/punish marijuana reform. Though not an official plan, based on a suggestion on Twitter I'm fixing to send him a DC postcard saying "Dear Rep. Harris, since apparently you're in charge of DC's daily affairs now, I'm very concerned about the lack of bike lanes on 16th Street, and also the insufficiently frequent trash pickup at the public bins on that street. Can you please address the issue?"  Reminder to Nevada goons: NV has until November 11 to get 101,667+ signatures for a voter initiative to legalize marijuana. I'll send them a few bucks, but just at a glance I'm concerned that their website blows and they don't appear to even have a Twitter. Their campaign needs four times as many sigs as DC, but we have a pretty decent website and active Twitter with 3000+ followers. Their website http://www.regulatemarijuanainnevada.org doesn't even pop up on the first page of google hits for "marijuana nevada". So I'm down with the cause, but this is not exuding fire in the belly. I dunno, anyone with a better handle on web design or social media development (regardless of state/country) want to ping these folks and try to get them some momentum?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland is still chest-pounding about how he's going to make sure DC's budget is modified to disallow/punish marijuana reform. Though not an official plan, based on a suggestion on Twitter I'm fixing to send him a DC postcard saying "Dear Rep. Harris, since apparently you're in charge of DC's daily affairs now, I'm very concerned about the lack of bike lanes on 16th Street, and also the insufficiently frequent trash pickup at the public bins on that street. Can you please address the issue?" Wouldnt this be a net good though? Note I am basing this on an article that said his amendment would have made DC unable to enforce the terms of its decriminalization, thus causing de facto legalization since it would bar police from making sure people arent carrying too much as well as having them unable to fine people for anything marijuana related. Wouldnt be surprised if he changed plans once it was pointed out to him though, and the news just hasnt trickled down to me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:I fully support legalization and regulation - one thing I think Colorado really got right (having been there since it's been legalized, haven't been to WA) is that the industry really embraced an engagement with the state to put together a structure to regulate the system. I think it's going to wind up being far too complicated, and probably simplified down the line, but it was well done. Washington State is going slower than Colorado, but the first legal shops opened this week. The regulators and the industry seem to be working together just fine. I haven't noticed any outbreaks of reefer madness in the streets. Have legalization campaigns in other places have run into pushback from medical suppliers? That was a thing in WA.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
Base Emitter posted:Have legalization campaigns in other places have run into pushback from medical suppliers? That was a thing in WA. Yeah, when humboldt county and mendocino county vote against legalization in california you know something is going on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
An exciting intermediary step:
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 06:15
|
|
|
Was anyone aware of the initiative to get marijuana legalization on the ballot in Arizona? Not enough signatures, now we have to hope it gets enough support to be on there for 2016.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
How has the recent New York Times endorsement of ending federal marijuana prohibition helped (or hurt) the cause of legalization in various states?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 13:16 |
|
|
Y-Hat posted:How has the recent New York Times endorsement of ending federal marijuana prohibition helped (or hurt) the cause of legalization in various states? In DC it was well-received, but far overshadowed by the fact that the president put out a statement saying he'd veto the DC funding bill that tries to block DC from reforming its marijuana laws. Also the Washington Post (which locally carries more weight) shifted its editorial policy from "well, maaaybe decrim but legal is crazy" to just "fuckit, let's just legalize". So those bits of news, plus the successful turn-in of petition signatures, and the enacting of decrim, really dominated the discourse. As a further happy update, the DC Board of Elections announced a bit back that Initiative 71 had passed through the challenge open period without anyone challenging signature validity. They conducted their review, and announced this morning that 23,780 valid signatures were needed: over 57,000 were turned in, 27,688 assessed as valid (I believe through rate sampling, not exhaustive count). So while we did overshoot a bit, it was a little closer than I expected, so I'm glad we went at it strong until the end just to be safe. Both mayoral candidates for this November are hedging their bets and saying they'll support "the will of the people". So at least good news that neither is campaigning on an anti-weed platform.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 00:44
|
|