Happy Holidays from I Love Weed!

Click to Enlarge

That is one thick toke. Source

Are the voters in Massachusetts ready to embrace marijuana legalization in 2012? Analysis of the vote on local marijuana legalization advisory ballot question strongly points to yes.

Massachusetts allows for citizens to place non-binding local “public policy questions” on the ballot. This year, in several precincts, voters weighed in on whether their local representatives should “vote in favor of legislation that would allow the state to regulate and tax marijuana in the same manner as alcohol.” On Tuesday, over 150,000 votes were cast on the issue across the state in districts containing around 8.5 percent of the total vote.

In the districts where it was on the ballot, the advisory question passed with an impressive 61 percent of the vote, but these districts were on the whole slightly more liberal and pro-reform than the rest of the state. To determine how these results might translate to a statewide marijuana legalization ballot question, I used two different metrics. Continue reading for the results.

2010 marijuana legalization advisory vote compared to 2008 decriminalization ballot initiative

First, I compared the results in these precincts for legalization to the 2008 results for Question 2, a sweeping marijuana decriminalization measure, which passed overwhelmingly statewide, 65 percent to 35 percent. These districts voted 70 percent for decriminalization, slightly higher than the state average. Assuming this relative level of support held true for legalization, you would expect that if the marijuana legalization question were on the ballot statewide, it would have passed this year with a vote of Yes 56.6 percent to No 44.4 percent.

2010 gubernatorial results compared to local marijuana legalization advisory question

The second metric I used was the total vote in these districts in the 2010 governor’s race–for both incumbent Democrat Deval Patrick and Green Party candidate Jill Stein–to find out how much more “liberal” these districts are than the rest of the state. There is a strong but imperfect correlation between voting for more liberal candidates and voters’ relative support for marijuana reform. In these districts, Patrick and Stein took 58 percent of the vote, compared to only 50 percent of the vote statewide. Using this liberal metric, I project marijuana legalization would have passed statewide with roughly a vote of Yes 53.1 percent to No 46.9 percent.

A small majority of Massachusetts voters likely support legalization

This analysis leads me to believe that a small majority of the individuals who turned out to vote this year in Massachusetts supported legalizing and regulating cannabis in the same way the state does alcohol. That is a good sign for marijuana reform given that midterm elections tend to have much lower turnouts among young voters–who are, in general, more supportive of legalization–and this midterm in particular had a higher than normal turnout among older conservatives, who tend not to support marijuana reform. For these reasons, the 2012 electorate is almost assured to been even more supportive of legalization than the 2010 electorate.

This analysis of the election results, combined with other factors, suggests Massachusetts is a strong candidate for becoming one of the first states to embrace legalization. Massachusetts is a very liberal state, has a huge number of colleges, is demographically relatively young, and contains an existing grassroots marijuana advocacy community. In 2008, the state passed Question 2, a strong marijuana decriminalization initiative, by 30 points. Most importantly, Massachusetts allows for binding statewide citizen-sponsored initiatives. There is strong evidence that if a well-crafted marijuana legalization initiative makes in onto the ballot in 2012, it could pass.

*There are several variables that could cause error in this analysis or make it not exactly apply to a binding statewide initiative. Imperfect Metrics: There is no prefect metric against which to compare the results. I think comparing them to the vote on decriminalization is pretty good, but it is possible more conservative parts of the state were only mildly less supportive than these districts of decriminalization, but would be dramatically less supportive of legalization. Dropoff: For obvious reasons, non-bidding advisory questions are not a top priority for voters, and around 10 percent of voters do not enter a preference. It is possible supporters are more likely to vote Yes, but those weakly opposed are more incline to just skip them, resulting in a slight overstatement of support. Cold Feet: There is probably some small percentage of voters who are fine sending the message they support legalization in general, but might change their minds when their vote might actually make it happen. Actual Ballot Language: Similarly, the actual language of a binding ballot initiative is very important, unlike an advisory question. It is probably impossible to craft a ballot initiative that every supporter of legalization would vote for. The specific design of provisions could cause some people to vote No even if they support the concept.

Source

Oakland, California (CNN) — Richard Lee sits before a classroom in Oakland explaining how the term marijuana has racist origins because it was first popularized to make Mexicans appear criminal and sinister.

Lee, credited with almost single-handedly getting a vote to legalize marijuana on California’s November ballot, is the founder of Oaksterdam University. Here, students from as far away as Florida and New Jersey learn to grow and market marijuana.

But that’s only after completing their core requirements, such as Lee’s politics and history class.

“We start off with politics and legal issues. That’s a prerequisite,” he said. “And then from there, we move on to horticulture, cooking with cannabis, hash-making, bud-tending, management, starting your own business, or incorporating, organizing.”

An array of students attend Oaksterdam. Some are interested in the legalization movement. Others want to work in a dispensary or production facility. A few have more entrepreneurial aspirations. The school took in about $1.5 million in tuition last year and is on track to collect $2 million this year.

An activist, entrepreneur and professor, Lee pumped more than $1 million of his own money into collecting the signatures to get adult marijuana use on the ballot.

It will take considerably more time and money to see the ballot passed, experts say. Not only do Californian opinions on legalization run the gamut, but experts also expect millions of dollars in special interest money to have an effect on public opinion.

“Like any issue you’re going to have, everybody has their own opinion. You try to come to a consensus and compromise. That’s politics,” Lee said.

What follows is a question-and-answer session with Lee. It has been edited for flow and length. Read more for the Q&A.

Why was it so important to do it this year?
Because we need to end cannabis prohibition as soon as possible. We need to get the people out of prison who shouldn’t be there. We need to stop the unnecessary violence, like the violence down in Mexico, the environmental damage. We need to prioritize our police. We need law enforcement to be going after the real criminals. Oh, and we need the tax money, too.

The state has estimated it could collect $1.4 billion in taxes if marijuana were legalized. Too high or too low?
That only covers the sales taxes and excise taxes, but there’s lots of other taxes. There’s payroll taxes, not to mention the other businesses, such as Oaksterdam University here. … Over half of our weekend seminar classes are people from other states. So those people are all renting hotel rooms and buying food and transportation, so that’s more jobs that are created and more taxes that will be collected. When I go to Amsterdam, I spend more on taxis and hotels than I do on cannabis.

How did you get involved with the legalization movement?
I was the victim of a carjacking and then the police response time was very slow, and that made me as mad as the carjacking. So I started thinking about what could be done to get better law enforcement. And that’s when I thought about cannabis prohibition wasting our law enforcement, that the cops are out there looking for people like me and my friends, who don’t want to hurt anybody, instead of going after the real sociopaths and predators.

What’s the purpose of Oaksterdam?
Well, it’s a couple things. One was to promote the idea of a legitimate cannabis industry, that it’s not just a few people giving it away to a few sick people to make them feel better. This is like other medicine and other industries, a real industry that creates real jobs.
The other thing is to train people, teach people about how to do it right. We saw there were a lot of people who wanted to get involved, who wanted to get into the politics and help end cannabis prohibition, but they didn’t know how. … They wanted to start a dispensary or work at a dispensary, but they didn’t know anything about it, so we saw the need for training.

There has long been an anti-establishment vibe surrounding marijuana, but it seems you’re trying to make it part of the establishment. Is that true?
Sure. It’s a legitimate business, legitimate industry like other ones. Just like the alcohol industry is a real business, whether it’s made illegal or not. All that does is increase crime, as we saw with alcohol prohibition. It just led to Al Capone and Chicago-style drive-by murders, drive-by shootings, which is just what we have now, right?

Why is it important to be part of the establishment?
If we’re going to change the laws and end prohibition, we need a majority of the voters to be for it. And that means that we’re going to have to work with the current political and economic structure that’s here.

How do you do that specifically?
We are big supporters of local charities and other things going on, such as the Fox Theater renovation. We were the No. 2 donor to that. We have a plaque in the sidewalk next to Bank of America, the No. 1 donor. And we donate to other charities, such as charter schools and senior associations. Member of the Rotary Club. The Chamber of Commerce came and helped us with the ribbon-cutting for the new school location here.

How are your interactions with the Oakland police?
The local Oakland police officers are very supportive. They know that we’ve helped improve the neighborhood and that we aren’t causing problems — if anything, that we’re part of the solution. And so we’ve always gotten a lot of support from them.

Describe this part of Oakland before Oaksterdam set up shop.
There were a lot of empty storefronts, and homeless people sleeping in the doorways. It was very empty. I remember when I first opened the Bulldog Coffee Shop in ’99, I didn’t know where any of the parking garages were around here because you could park on the street right in front. Now you can’t find a parking space. You have to use the parking garage because all the street parking is so full.

Is economic revitalization a handy tool in selling the movement?
When you talk to the neighbors around here … they love us. We bring in lots of traffic. We bring in lots of business. Lots of our customers go there and buy stuff. … The Oakland city administrator has done two reports that the cannabis dispensaries have caused very little problems. They’ve caused much less problems than the places with alcohol permits.

Even if it is legalized, there will be people against it and cities that refuse to take part?
Not to get into a rant here, but the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not end racism. It only ended the laws that encouraged or validated racism, right? But even after we get rid of the laws against cannabis, there’s still going to be people who are against it no matter what the law is. I see this as like turning around a supertanker. It doesn’t turn on a dime and so the laws are just one part of changing the culture that’s prejudiced and bigoted against cannabis consumers.

Give an example of government regulations that help the industry.
I think it’s already happening with medical marijuana, where you see, for instance, zoning, reasonable zoning just like we have zoning for liquor stores and bars. We don’t have those open up right next to elementary schools.
So I think reasonable regulations like we have for alcohol will get more people to understand the difference between prohibition and regulation because some people are confused. They think that legalization means it’s going to be free and legal, vending machines in the elementary schools, things like that. There’s a big difference between legal like Budweiser and legal like orange juice.

What about the black market? We still have one for alcohol almost 80 years after prohibition.
How many moonshiners are there, though? You don’t hear much about violence between moonshiners shooting it out for street corners.

If the ballot passes in November, what –
When the ballot passes, when it passes.

OK, when the ballot passes in November, what do you see happening across California?
Loud cheers by all the people who have always seen this as hypocritical and unfair and unjust — that alcohol is legal, not only legal but advertised on television and radio to kids during sports programming. Meanwhile, we say we have to lock people up for cannabis. So the big thing will be moving us one step closer to changing federal law.

So how long can you make it last. Whether for recreational use or not.

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

From StopTheDrugWar.com

Proposition 19, California’s tax and regulate pot initiative, has received yet another large late donation, this one from Progressive Insurance founder Peter Lewis, who announced Saturday he was donating $209,500 for the effort.

“I’m supporting the campaign because I support common-sense reform of the nation’s drug laws,” Lewis said Saturday in a statement. “I admire the effort, energy and commitment of the people involved in the campaign, and want to help them get their message out to the voters.”

The initiative would legalize the possession of up to an ounce of marijuana for adults 21 and older. They could also grow up to 25 square feet of pot and possess the harvest. Cities and counties could permit, tax, and regulate commercial marijuana sales and cultivation.

Prop 19 holds a four-point lead in the Talking Points Memo Polltracker average of the 13 polls taken on it so far this year. Prop 19 has 47.4% in the poll average to 43.2% against, with less than 10% undecided. Only three of the 13 polls have shown it losing, but with support under 50%, voter turnout and the undecideds will be critical in achieving victory

The closeness of the race has inspired a surge of late donations to the campaign, including $170,000 from Facebook co-founders Dustin Moskovitz and Sean Parker and $75,000 from Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soap heir David Bronner and $25,000 from Washington, DC’s Capitol Hemp earlier this month. Since then, in addition to the funds from Lewis, the Prop 19 campaign committee has also received $19,000 in $1,000 or more contributions.

By contrast, the opposition Public Safety First campaign, which had only $54,000 in the bank at the end of September, has received only one large donation, for $25,000, since then. Still, neither campaign has the funds for a last minute TV ad blitz, and for Prop 19, it’s now all about beating the bushes for voters and getting them to the polls, the earlier the better. Early voting got underway this week.

Lewis actually gave only $59,500 to the Prop 19 campaign committee, with the other $159,005 going to the Drug Policy Action Committee, an independent entity controlled by the Drug Policy Alliance. While that committee is spending money on get out the vote efforts, it also donated $35,000 to the Prop 19 campaign committee Thursday.

Lewis, whose net worth Forbes pegs at $1.1 billion, has given millions to the drug reform cause in the past decade and a half. In 1996, Lewis donated $500,000 for Prop 215, California’s ground-breaking medical marijuana initiative. He gave another $1 million to Prop 36 in 2000, which diverted thousands of nonviolent drug offenders from prison to treatment. And he has donated $2-3 million a year to fund other drug reform efforts.

Source.

These are the trees we should be cutting down around the world, but for human consumption.

I’m guessing most of us started in our teens, but it would be interesting to know the average age our viewers started smoking weed.

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

I’d give ‘em a dollar. At least I’d know they wouldn’t be blowing it on booze and waking up in a field somewhere.

This week we are curious to know how much weed our viewers tend to smoke. Some may buy weed very seldom, others may buy ounces every week. Let us know in the comments why you smoke so little or so much!

Be sure to become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter for the latest news right in your feed. Stay high everybody.

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Here are some bud shots to get you through my busy week!

Click to Enlarge

What is weed? That is a very good question and depending on who you ask, you are going to get very different answers. To me weed is a way to enhance things that I would have already been doing (writing, eating, sleeping) as well as helps me with my depression and helps me to be more creative with my writing. To me, weed is also a business and I feel like we are witnessing history and a potential end to prohibition within our lifetime. Weed is a gift. Weed is amazing. You see what it means to all these people above. What is weed to you?

Source

via HMJ

Continue reading for more!

As a bonus, here is my kitty!

Stoners around the world should roll one up in celebration today.

California state lawmakers have just passed the “first formal consideration of marijuana legalization in American history.” Assemblymember Tom Ammanio’s Assembly Bill 390 – the Marijuana Control, Regulation, and Education Act – was heard and voted on in the Committee for Public Safety. The bill passed 4-3, and will next be heard by the Committee for Public Health.

But the vote was only a minor victory for the pro-legalization lobby. (AB 390 may very well die in the health committee.) The real test will come in November, when voters will consider the Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010, which, in a nutshell, will legalize pot for personal and agricultural use. (Recent polls show about 56 percent support the bill.)

It’s hard to argue that progress isn’t being made for the movement. As the old “Reefer Madness” stereotypes die away, several states are seriously considering marijuana legalization. Check out the headlines from the last few days: “Stiletto Stoners,” “It’s High Time for Debate,” and “Pot Town, USA.”

Clearly, marijuana prohibition has been a failure. Every U.S. citizen can get his or her hands on a baggie of marijuana if they want to, usually within 24 hours. The plant itself can be grown outside or inside by novices – because, frankly, it grows like a weed. A casual smoker is no different than a fan of Budweiser or Coors.

The pro-pot movement looks to California as the first battleground state, where medical marijuana is already generating millions of dollars a year in taxes. As Assemblymember Ammanio’s bill works its way through the red tape, more news is sure to come out about marijuana legalization. Stay informed!

Just starting a new blog, I will be updating it with weed and other marijuana news.