… And it’s still illegal to carry on federal land (including boarders). This is a win but it’s a fucking minor one.
Amazingly enough after Canada legalized weed our country didn’t instantly fall into anarchy.
US stayes that legalized weed had all of the predicted positive outcomes like reduced crime related to weed, increased taxes because it is taxed, etc.
You know, the obvious outcomes for anyone who doesn’t buy into reefer madness.
The oligarchs need more time to monopolize the market. Can’t have folks growing their own plants when there’s money to be made now
/s because internet
When we know in reality they needed time push laws through so they can make sure to keep the prisons fill with slave labor.
Big Tobacco’s held a copyright on cannabis cigarettes since the late 80s… Educate yourselves.
Legalizing weed would drastically reduce the prison population of America.
And we all know how bad that would be.
/s
They’ll figure out another way to get their slaves :/
Who will punch all our license plates?! Imagine the cost to society! /s
Prison slave labor makes a lot more than just license plates.
I am, depressingly, aware. License plates are the stereotypical example (at least in my mind).
It’s absolutely fucking atrocious that anyone is allowed to profit off prison labor. At the very least those funds could be sent to halfway homes but they should probably just be paid to prisoners.
Pretty much all the rice grown in America is from Angola prison.
They can still use weed to populate prisons. This reclassification changes nothing in that regard.
Why doesn’t anyone think of the prison owners?
Still waiting on Congress to decriminalize and expunge records.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3617
Amazingly enough after Canada legalized weed our country didn’t instantly fall into anarchy.
Not yet my friend, not yet /s
I don’t think you’ve visited enough Canadian online communities.
If you ask the internet, specifically Reddit, Galen Loblaw will arrest you for buying 30% off stewing beef at the self scan, and while you’re shopping your car will have been stolen and TFWs will have taken your job.
Galen Weston is definitely a huge asshole, but I’d blame that one more on capitalism and greed. The weed helps us endure the price fixing bullshittery.
TFWs will have taken your job.
That Feeling When’s?
Those are primarily ppl larping as canucks, and the same stupid 20% of the population that believes their bullshit as any other country. Like the morons wearing maga hats at a clownvoy rally.
If you go into a thread with real Canadians in it, you will most likely not see anybody having a problem with foreign workers or immigration.
Galen Weston can fucking die though… We all agree on that.
Admittedly I’m sitting here in Winnipeg, having just taken a huge bong rip but I would sincerely challenge your claims that our country didn’t fall into anarchy post legalisation.
I’m not saying weed is the cause, in fact I believe more people should take a toke but seeing everything around me going to shit like it is, seeing it accelerate since '19 doesn’t really help with this Indica induced anxiety. Trucker convoy, campuses being taken hostage, food banks over run… This ain’t been a good run bro.
I agree that weed wasn’t the cause - I’d also argue that it isn’t Canada as much as the whole fucking world going to pot. And, as much as I’d hate the conservatives even more, neoliberalism has been absolutely wrecking us. Things like food banks, health care, public transit, and the post service don’t need to be independently profitable. Raise our fucking taxes and fund this shit right.
Hey a half a loaf. Its Zenos paradox of legalization. With progress like this, in another 40 years we’ll be another halfway there to legalization.
It will at least open up research for cannabis drug development into FDA approved products.
It also basically will legalize Medical cannabis federally. This could lead to many other benefits. Get a medical card, it’s legit with the state and the feds, then there shouldn’t be any grounds for drug tests to affect your employment.
The big thing is federal contracts.
Its 10 years too late for anyone to care I think. Democrats should have just straight up legalized under Obama, and even if they legalized now, they aren’t going to be making major points off this politically. Its just jerk-off material for the commentary crowd. If it isn’t going to make a difference to peoples lived experience, it isn’t worth pursuing.
You guys seem to think that the democrats had a fillabuster proof majority the entirety of obama’s terms.
They had two years. In those two years, they spent their capital on getting the ACA passed.
Then the 2010 midterms happened, and the dems lost any chance of anything meaningful happening.
To be clear, they didn’t have 2 years. They had ~70 days where they had the seats to pass legislation. That’s when they passed the ACA.
ACA, civil rights legislation, climate policy, and immigration reform. It was a pretty progressive two years.
But not progressive enough so I will help the least progressive candidate win. /s
And you seem to think two years is basically no time at all. Think about how much awful shit Republicans got up to under Trump. Approximately half of that got done in a two year period and that was even a historically deadlocked Congress. Democrats lost in 2010 precisely because two years is a long time and the best thing they got out of it was a shitty healthcare plan that, more than anything, ensured our current unsustainable system stays in place for at least another generation.
Democrats are obviously much better than Republicans in basically every sense of the word, but Republicans get their legislation passed when they have the chance and Democrats trip all over themselves trying to appease the idiots who will never join their coalition. They could learn a lot from Republicans about pushing their agenda but it seems pretty clear by now they aren’t going to.
It’s the classic problem. Democrats can’t get anything done, Republicans get the wrong thing done. Been that way as long as I can remember.
Turns out, it’s easier to break stuff than to create actual policy.
Yep, it’s amazing what you can do if you ignore laws, lock out the opposite side, control all three branches of government, and literally pass shit with stuff penciled in on the side.
Being democratic and inclusive is pointless if it prevents progress. People want good, affordable healthcare more than they care about if it was achieved with Republicans at the table too. The Democratic process is a means to an end, it’s not sacred and should be disposed of when it can’t work.
If Democrats are incapable of governing when given the power, maybe we should stop voting for them.
There is no point in empowering someone with my vote if they can’t do anything with it once they’ve taken power.
Republicans have gotten more done in minority positions than Democrats have when in majority position over the past 20 years.
Democrats are conveniently bad at this shit when it comes to getting the things their voters want done, done. When it comes to getting shit Republicans want done, they are also conveniently powerless.
Maybe we shouldn’t vote for Democrats.
deleted by creator
Two years of a filibuster proof majority for a president elected on hope and change, and the best they can do is a conservative healthcare plan, packed with giveaways for the big insurers.
That’s when I lost all faith in the democratic party.
Because Joseph Lieberman wouldn’t allow it to pass without removing the public option and he was the lone vote they needed to overcome the filibuster
Yep there’s always a rotating villain, how convenient.
He wasn’t “a rotating villain”
He was always a villain.
a president elected on hope and change
Here’s a little middle school social studies lesson for you: there is a lot more to the government than the President.
Bernie Sanders could be sitting in the Oval Office right now and he’d still be struggling with the political realities that Biden is dealing with today. There would still be multiple wars raging, there would still be Republican obstructionism, there would still be a Republican controlled House and a tied Senate, etc. And I’m willing to bet you would be sitting here commenting on how “disappointing” he ended up being as a progressive…
If you want big, sweeping FDR-style changes, then elect a big sweeping congressional supermajority like FDR had. It’s not rocket science, people like you would rather just shy away from the political reality of getting bills passed in favor of complaining online, and it’s getting boring.
Ah yeah, Romneycare with no public option and my friends with kids still can’t afford to actually use the doctor because the deductible is so high.
Soooooo glad that they spent all their political capital on a handout to the insurance companies.
Love it when they just pass Republican legislation and call it a “win” for Democrats.
If my eyes rolled any harder they’d be on the floor.
The ACA was a numbers game so Democrats could pat themselves on the back at the number of “insured” people ignoring whether or not that “insurance” actually got those people access to medical care. “Insured” means nothing if you can’t use it.
But good for them for being able to point at some numbers and pat each other on the back for a “job well done” I guess?
The ACA has helped the insanely destitute (in states that even use it, so not everywhere), but it has not helped the general US public nor even come close to solving the medical insurance crisis and high cost of medical care crisis.
But tell me more about how we’re supposed to be so happy for half-assed plans copied from Republicans.
ACA killed “Pre Existing conditions”, allowed children to stay on parent’s insurance until 25. It eliminated lifetime coverage limits, and expanded Medicare access to millions of people.
Keep patting yourself on the back. I’m sure it will suddenly make healthcare affordable somehow.
It’s not like medical bills continue to be the number one reason for bankruptcy or anything.
I found a photo of you:
Here’s a picture of you Tubgirl.jpg
Are people not allowed to point out the corn nuggets in the shit sandwich without being mocked by you? Do you know more about that commenter than you’re letting on or do you just enjoy unloading on would be allies?
That all depends on when Democrats get congressional majority. Congress is responsible for legislative decriminalization.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3617
You make the assumption that Democrats (the politicians, not the voters) actually see this as a legislative priority.
Kamala has been treating it as priority, and speaking in favor of it every chance she gets. The bill was co-sponsored by 114 Democrats.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3617/cosponsors
Any day now then…
Which party voted for all the state level legalization efforts?
For people like me who use it medicinally, this is a huge win.
Society is like a big vehicle. It takes time to change its course. Calm down.
Calm down.
The world doesn’t actually improve in fits an starts. Incrementalism is a fallacy. The world improves in large sweeping movements that are eventually ground backwards. We make major improvement through bold action, not trivial improvements.
I have no obligation to support a muted political movement incapable of accomplishing its purported objectives.
US Democrats could have done this a decade ago. They could have codified abortion rights. They could have made so many things a priority: they choose not to. I owe nothing to a failed approach to politics.
Ok, so… What big, sweeping things are YOU doing to make society better? Where’s your list of accomplishments?
The Democrats don’t have a perfect track record, not even close. But being part of the online peanut gallery of whiners doesn’t get us anywhere. I’m so tired of people who are all commentary and no action, people who aren’t going to be part of progress (big or small) are part of the problem no matter how smug you act about it.
US Democrats could have done this a decade ago. They could have codified abortion rights. They could have made so many things a priority: they choose not to. I owe nothing to a failed approach to politics.
I must correct you there. There is a theory that says that politics has to fulfill the will of its average voter. It can not lean further left than that. Otherwise it looses voters on the righter side.
What you have is a convenient and wrong interpretation of how politics work.
Its interesting that when its a step in the authoritarian or right-wing direction, its always possible. When its a step towards humanism or the left, its never possible or only ever an epsilon of progress.
Why do you think that is?
The fallacy thats baked into your thinking that causes you to make this mistake is shown by this assumption you make:
Otherwise it looses voters on the righter side.
The idea that voters exist along a symmetrical distribution is the mistake you are making. People are not randomly coming up with their beliefs and there is no reason you should assume it would follow a gaussian.
Its a persistent and wrong assumption, that resulted in the kind of demonstrated impotence of the American Democrats.
Interestingly, the American Right wing doesn’t share that belief around real-politik. And because they don’t make this wrong assumption, their voters actually get the policy decisions they want into law.
Its interesting that when its a step in the authoritarian or right-wing direction, its always possible. When its a step towards humanism or the left, its never possible or only ever an epsilon of progress.
Why do you think that is?
Because people are, in fact, pretty right-wing authoritarian.
The idea that voters exist along a symmetrical distribution is the mistake you are making. People are not randomly coming up with their beliefs and there is no reason you should assume it would follow a gaussian.
I never said that it was a symmetrical or normal distribution. I am well aware that it is not. But it is still a distribution.
And people do come up with their own beliefs. It’s not as if you can just tell them what to believe. People’s will comes first, parties and their ideas come second.
So it moves to be rescheduled but is just being sent to DEA for them to now think about it?
I get it’s news but I don’t see what is actually changing
Its the next major step in the process of getting it rescheduled. Each step could potentially end that process, so each movement forward is great news.
The DEA already agreed to the FDA’s Schedule III recommendation. Now it’s open for 60 days of public comment.
If there’s no change in mind, it gets passed to up the to both HHS and DOJ as approvals, then sent to Biden to sign off. (I think)
the government is so pathetically slow and people love to celebrate this bullshit facade of progress for some reason. this should’ve been done 20 fucking years ago, i’m not giving them props for that now. not a chance.
Best time to make a change was 20 years ago. Second best time is now. Progress is progress. Would you rather it continue to not happen?
Yes. Yes they would. Is this your first time on Lemmy?
No kidding especially after 40 fucking states have medical marijuana programs while the DEA still considers it Schedule I “high potential for abuse with no known medical use.”
There’s two things this changes.
-
Easier to research.
-
We get a lot less tax money from it.
For 1, it’s not that much of a gain, we don’t need more studies to show it’s safe. That’s been accomplished, and it wasn’t that hard to do a study the last couple years.
For 2, tax money was the biggest reason states could be convinced to legalize.
There’s a little bit of a 3 involved. I forget the specifics from an earlier article, but I read something about while a lower schedule may let them transition from cash only to banking, the DEA can still seize all their funds because it’s on the schedule. It’s just now they can do it from a computer.
When they don’t use banks, at least the DEA had to actually show up and
stealseize their cash.So say a Republican takes office and is pissed at Cali, he can tell the DEA to freeze and seize the bank accounts of every business and person connected to the cannabis industry.
And it’d all be 100% legal, take very little effort, and can easily be converted into some kind of “border security” bullshit like building a giant pointless wall.
I dunno, lately I keep getting frustrated at people never realizing what shit can naturally lead to. Maybe my standards for planning ahead need lowered?
I just don’t understand why this is acceptable when Biden told us decriminalization was the goal.
A co.plete removal from the schedule would have been that, and would have accomplished a lot and taken the same effort as this. I don’t see why we don’t try to actually fix shit.
I don’t see why we don’t try to actually fix shit.
Because then they can’t keep kicking the can down the road for the next election.
Gotta keep that voter base involved somehow, and when you aren’t actually gonna give them anything to be happy about, you’ve got to trot out nice little lies you’ll never follow through with to make them get out to vote.
Exactly why I’m not playing this year. I give up.
username checks out
Biden is right of Reagan.
Get a clue.
Dems are not in favor of legalization. Neither are liberals.
Biden is right of Reagan.
On which policies?
Dems are not in favor of legalization.
Then why has literally every single legalization come from democrats?
Man I hope you’re the dumbest motherfucker on this website. I don’t think I can take anything worse.
deleted by creator
-
Still illegal without prescription
Will this allow dispenseries and retail stores to use banking?
Probably not yet…biggest advantage of moving from Sch 1 to Sch 3 is that it means federal research grants/money can be used now to determine what the actual medicinal uses.
Nice. So we’ll publicly fund the research and the drug companies get a bunch of new medicines and don’t have to pay for the rights.
No. It is still a controlled substance. They have merely lowered it’s classification rather than DE-classifying it entirely, which is what they should have done.
Will they retroactively commute sentences of people who were charged with the previous classification?
No, because it’s still illegal. This reclassification is a compromise, not a solution.
baby steps.
Biden has done what he is able to do. He proclaimed presidential pardon for federal marijuana charges in late 2022. However, the executive branch has no authority to impact state level charges, which would likely be the vast majority of people affected by marijuana policing over time. In a world where government works as intended, state level organizations should take their cues from what the federal government is doing, but, as I understand it, they are not necessarily beholden to slavishly adopt the federal posture. Perhaps someone with a deeper understanding might illuminate us further.
That’s about right.
Federal prosecution is rare. If they charge you with marijuana possession at the federal level, then there’s probably a list of a dozen other charges on top of it, and at least one of them is the serious thing they’re actually after you for. Feds don’t waste their time with this shit unless there’s a bigger reason.
So what Biden did has very little practical effect. A bunch of people got one charge among many taken off their record. That’s what he’s able to do with just a stroke of a pen. The rest is dependent on states, federal congress, or the vast federal bureaucracy.
As a small, optimistic caveat to the above, Biden’s pardon does work for anyone who was charged in Washington DC since they don’t have a state body representing them. So, yes, typically anyone with a federal marijuana charge is also likely the subject of many more serious charges, there is a population of people that may have received immediate relief at the time, which is good.
So how many other agencies have to sign off on this?
As many as they can possibly require so that this doesn’t finish before Trump is inaugurated next year. Then he can kill it and the democrats can recycle the campaign material in 2028.
What happened to legalization?
The President can initiate rescheduling, but does not have the power to decriminalize (legalize) a drug on their own. That requires an act of Congress. The current bill for decriminalization and record expungement is in the House with 113 Democrat cosponsors. We’re just waiting on Republicans to come around.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3617/cosponsors
In all but a handful of states, you can buy almost anything you want online and have it legally shipped to you.
You’re talking about state law, and this is federal law
2018 Farm Bill. I’m in Texas and get a lot of it legally delivered to my mailbox.
This is not a win, don’t mistake it. They reclassified it and now it’s going to be even hard to legalize because they’ll use the excuse “we reclassified it already!”. Full legalization is what we need, this doesn’t actually change shit. Marijuana being illegal is one of the most racist laws we have.
Only on lemmy would Biden drastically reducing a very stupid and racist drug law that has persisted for decades be a bad thing.
Changing the classification away from “its basically heroin” changes a lot actually. Research funding, federal therapeutic use, authorized law enforcement actions, banking laws, these are all able to be shifted and changed in the context of weed now.
Its not the end of federal legalization attempts, it’s the start. It drastically normalizes something at a federal level that has already been legalized at a state level. That’s how you fully legalize it.
It’s not some imagined set back because of weak “we did enough already” arguments that no one actually believes, especially with federal legalization at 70% popularity.
Only on lemmy would Biden drastically reduceding a very stupid and racist drug classification that has persisted for decades be a bad thing.
Lemmy is so full of extremists it’s insane. Nothing but unwavering ideological commitment is accepted by any side. There is no positive news, only unethical compromise.
it’s not just lemmy or reddit…
I blame the migration from Reddit
federal legalization at 70% popularity
You just made clear that we don’t have a system that represents the people. How exactly does it become legal now with the argument “we just reclassified it”? When does that happen? 2, 5, 10 years from now?
You just made clear that we don’t have a system that represents the people.
Who the fuck thought we did?
Anyone who believes the statement “land of the free, home of the brave” or “for liberty and justice for all”. You’re blind to think that we don’t have so many in the US who believe we have a free country, and a free market.
You’re just arguing whatever makes you angry like so many others on the Internet. 🥱
Good troll. I hope you like America after Trump wins because of stupid bullshit that our country keeps pulling. 🤡
WTF are you even talking about? How does that relate at all to the previous posts in this thread? You might want to see the doctor because you post like you have a brain worm.
If you’re so up in arms about the inherent racism in the criminalization and exploitation of cannabis, maybe don’t use the manufactured term “marijuana”, hmm? Coined to sound foreign (yes, Spanish specifically), it’s part of the whole plan in the first place. 🤫
manufactured term “marijuana”
In accordance with my initial point that it’s a racist law to keep it illegal, I’ll use cannabis from now on. Reading the history of the usage of the term “marijuana/marihuana/mariguana”.
It’s funny how we try to regulate a plant, yet the term cannabis could be referring to industrial hemp or the dankest highest THC concentration cultivar possible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana_(word)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_sativa#Cultivars
Broadly, there are three main cultivar groups of cannabis that are cultivated today:
Cultivars primarily cultivated for their fibre, characterized by long stems and little branching.[21]
Cultivars grown for seed which can be eaten entirely raw or from which hemp oil is extracted.
Cultivars grown for medicinal or recreational purposes, characterized by extensive branching to maximize the number of flowers.[21]
A nominal if not legal distinction is often made between industrial hemp, with concentrations of psychoactive compounds far too low to be useful for that purpose, and marijuana.
If by “funny”, you mean “profit driven, all the way down”, then yeah. It’s fucking hilarious.
glad we got an expert to clear that up
Touch grass, toke grass, whatever’s clever. Take care of you, citizen. Simmer.
Now if we could just agree that a plant that grows naturally is not a fucking drug
Just because something psychoactive grows in nature doesn’t mean it is not a drug. Anything that has a physical or psychoactive effect, or anything at all beyond nutrition, is a drug. DMT, Salvia, Psilocin, Mescaline, Phenethylamine, Opium, these are all indeed drugs.
The reason you said this is because the word drug has a (very unfair) negative association because it is used as a blanket term to describe the reason someone acts a certain way on them, therefore making it seem that all drugs are bad (drugs, like anything in life, are only bad if you abuse them).
I tend to associate the word drug with something made in a lab for a medicinal or elective purpose. Hence why we call pharmacies “Drug Stores” and not “Herbal Stations”
there is a very specific legal definition of a drug which the FDA has clarified as anything that is intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.
