The Republican presidential primary looks to be boiled down to three real candidates following the Iowa caucus and one, Marco Rubio, should have cannabis law reformers and civil libertarians concerned. The Reefer Madness candidate was Chris Christie, who famously stated that marijuana users were diseased and needed curing with law enforcement (and we had some fun at Christie’s expense here at Marijuana Politics), but he’s likely to fade away after New Hampshire. Senator Rubio, however, has echoed Christie’s prohibitionist policies and has emerged as the GOP establishment candidate.

You never want to take too much away from just one election, particularly a low-turnout caucus that doesn’t reflect the demographics of the rest of the country, but reading the political tea leaves, it isn’t hard to see that the top three finishers, Ted Cruz, Donald Trump and Marco Rubio look to be the three GOP frontrunners. Of course, the Democrats are officially down to two, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, as Martin O’Malley has exited the race.

Donald Trump will continue to poll well, in the short-term at least, as his name recognition, anti-establishment message and media attention should keep a significant portion of his voters clinging to him (he could shoot somebody and still keep his support, don’t ya know). Ted Cruz has captured the evangelical Christian base and with Mike Huckabee out of the race, and once Ben Carson exits the race, Cruz will capture more conservative Christian support. The establishment backers and donors, of candidates from Jeb Bush to Chris Christie will likely see Rubio as an acceptable candidate. The one wild card that could get the backing of the establishment, with a strong showing in New Hampshire, is John Kasich, another candidate the cannabis community should fear.

Of the GOP’s three-headed monster, Donald Trump  (as much as it pains me to give him any kind of credit) seems to be the best on marijuana policy. Before he flip-flopped on most social issues to run as a Republican, The Donald, was a social liberal that even supported the legalization of all drugs. Now that a GOP presidential frontrunner, he supports medical cannabis and while he personally opposes full legalization, appears to support a states’ rights position on the issue.

Ted Cruz, on the other hand, as my fellow Marijuana Politics blogger Romain Bonilla pointed out previously, flip-flopped the opposite way on marijuana and “evolved” on the issue, remembering that true conservatives are supposed to believe in states’ rights. Personally, I believe that he called out President Obama for not wastefully enforcing federal marijuana laws in Colorado and Washington because Republicans have a knee-jerk reaction to attack President Obama; once he came to his senses a bit, as much as Ted Cruz can come to his senses, he went back to the conservative position.

While Drug War reformers, marijuana legalization supporters and civil libertarians may oppose Trump and Cruz for a variety of reasons, Marco Rubio is the current existential threat to our cause. A Rubio Administration seems poised to use paramilitary SWAT-like raids upon nonviolent citizens following state cannabis laws. While extreme force and draconian federal sentences won’t really set back the marijuana movement, they will unnecessarily ruin lives and waste our resources. Reefer Madness Rubio must not be granted the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

(Featured photo credit: AP/Reuters/J Pat Carter/David Becker/John Locher)

Former Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders was ahead of her time in many ways. The first African American to hold the post, she was only the 2nd woman as well. Like any great pioneer, she hasn’t been afraid to speak her mind on a whole host of issues, from marijuana to masturbation. Working under the Bill Clinton Administration, Dr. Elders proposed that the United States study the possibility of ending prohibition all the way back in 1993. Elders didn’t receive support from the administration and eventually resigned after taking flak for recommending that masturbation should be taught as part of a healthy sex education.

In 2010, Dr. Elders endorsed California’s Proposition 19 cannabis legalization measure. While the effort didn’t win at the ballot box, it did help change the national debate, benefiting the successful campaigns in Washington in Colorado two years later. On February 13th, Dr. Elders will be returning to California to speak about the need to legalize and regulate marijuana at the International Cannabis Business Conference (ICBC) in San Francisco.

This is an important time for the entire cannabis legalization movement, especially California, as Golden State voters may just be voting on a legalization measure this November. The San Francisco Chronicle interviewed Dr. Elders, asking her about her experience as a pioneer and the impacts that cannabis legalization can have:

Q: What do you think the impact of legalization would be on low-income communities? On communities of color?

A: With legalization, we would stop using our poor to subsidize private prison industries. … We should spend more money on drug treatment rather than incarceration. Also, states and federal government would not spend so much on keeping people warehoused in prisons, and could spend that money on education and community development.

People’s lives could improve by not having the specter of a criminal conviction hovering over them forever, affecting child custody, voting rights, employment, business loans, trade licensing, student aid, public housing and other public assistance. The consequences of any drug conviction are lifelong and severe and are not experienced equally throughout the population despite comparable drug use and selling rates; African Americans and Hispanics are disproportionately punished for drug law violations whether they are for drug using or selling.

Partially thanks to mainstream officials like Dr. Elders, the cannabis law reform community is leaps and bounds ahead of where it was in 1993 when she first called for our nation to study the benefits of legalization and even 2010, when she endorsed California Proposition 19. It will be great to hear from Dr. Elders at the ICBC on how she feels about the progress made and the challenges ahead for a rational national drug policy. Hopefully, she is encouraged by our recent advances and appreciates the gains that we have made, thanks to outspoken trailblazers like herself.

Rubio was the real GOP winner while the Democrats prepare for a  slog after a tie

After months (years?) of campaigning in one of the more unique political seasons in modern American history, the Iowa caucus results are in. Republican Ted Cruz won a solid electoral victory while Marco Rubio won the political victory.

The Democratic candidates virtually tied, with progressive values winning the day, setting up a long campaign between a vision of major progressive change versus more incremental reform. Cannabis legalization supporters and civil libertarian activists can generally be pleased with the Democratic results. There is cause for alarm on the Republican side–the rise of Marco Rubio.

A tie really? How can it take so long for precincts to report? Who has all night for this?

A decisive electoral victory by Bernie Sanders would have been preferred by myself, and I believe most cannabis law reformers and many civil libertarian advocates, but Bernie Sanders could declare a political victory, even though he may not actually end up with quite as many votes or delegates as the establishment-favored candidate. Most media outlets, likely because they privately (and sometimes publicly) dismissed the idea that a 74 year-old democratic socialist from a small rural state like Vermont could actually take on the formidable Clinton political machine.

Senator Bernie Sanders declared a “virtual tie” and I think that this is an actual time that a “virtual” electoral tie is a “literal” political tie. (Hillary Clinton actually won two delegates by winning coin flips after precinct votes ended in ties. Update: 6 delegates won by coin flips!) Sanders proved that he is a worthy challenger while Hillary Clinton demonstrated that she is the frontrunner for a reason. The anti-establishment candidate called for a political revolution after declaring “virtual tie” while the establishment frontrunner declared a “sigh of relief” in a speech that listed a very progressive platform.

We accomplished what the political establishment said was impossible. Don’t underestimate us https://t.co/DeV0NhI2mi pic.twitter.com/CwH0mhkkT2

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 2, 2016

Hillary Clinton “breathes sigh of relief” but does not declare Democratic win #IowaCaucus https://t.co/rr2i6xS07g https://t.co/ffc5mpigC4 — BBC Breaking News (@BBCBreaking) February 2, 2016

For various reasons, including the political ideals of Democratic-leaning voters, Hillary Clinton, will be decent on drug law reform and most civil liberties. The former Secretary of State’s foreign policy is a bit hawkish for my tastes, so I do fear potential losses due to national security fears in time of war, but not near as much as what I fear from the Republicans.

In politics, expectations can actually elevate the third place finisher over the winner

While Ted Cruz earned the most GOP votes and delegates, Marco Rubio became the big political winner by finishing in third place, setting himself up as the the Republican establishment candidate. The large number of evangelical Christians propelled Ted  Cruz to first place, the electoral demographics don’t look great for Cruz in New Hampshire and beyond.

Donald Trump seemed to be the political loser, finishing 2nd, as his “I’m a winner and we’re gonna win so much when I win” persona took a hit. It will be interesting to see how Marco Rubio fares in New Hampshire and South Carolina when the Donald starts attacking the new establishment standard-bearer.

Tonight is a victory for the grassroots, for conservatives across Iowa, and conservatives across the nation. pic.twitter.com/WPsvqyJ3sl

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) February 2, 2016

For marijuana law supporters, Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, are likely to be rather states-rights oriented, while Marco Rubio is more likely to be a Reefer Madness-inspired disaster as he has pledged to waste scarce federal resources needlessly arresting and prosecuting nonviolent citizens following state laws and regulations. All of the Republican candidates, except Rand Paul (who unfortunately isn’t going to win the GOP nomination), seem all too willing to wage war, so all are threats to our civil liberties. Despite his rather libertarian past, I shudder at the thought of Donald Trump with his finger on the button.

Democrats will have a long battle, GOP will too unless Trump’s mystique fades away

So we’re on to New Hampshire, where Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump have been enjoying large leads in the polls. While civil libertarians and Drug War reformers have a tremendous candidate in Bernie Sanders and a good candidate in Hillary Clinton, we have a real danger on the Republican side–Marco Rubio. Marco Rubio provides a strong general election challenge, providing the GOP a young, new face from an important electoral vote-rich state.

Supporters of sensible cannabis policies and other civil liberty protections need to help ensure that Marco Rubio is not the next President of the United States. We definitely don’t want a Rubio-Kasich ticket as a prohibitionist ticket as elected candidates out of Florida and Ohio pose a serious challenge in Electoral College match.

Iowa is too close to call and young voters could very well determine the Democratic Iowa caucus winner and thus, the nominee and future leader of the free world. On the biggest issues of the day, Hillary Clinton has been out of touch with young voters, while Bernie Sanders has been consistently on the right side of history.

Eight years ago, young Iowa voters helped shock the political establishment and create the momentum to elect an African-American with the middle name Hussein. Hopefully, young Iowans choose hope once again, and help create the momentum needed to elect a 74 year-old Jewish democratic socialist without ties to organized religion. Bernie Sanders and his amazing campaign have pushed Hillary Clinton to adopt more progressive positions on a whole host of issues – but she still doesn’t have the track record of Senator Sanders.

“There is no question that the War on Drugs has failed,” Senator Bernie Sanders.

Let’s start with prisons, and the need to end our era of mass incarceration. While Clinton now claims to want to undo many of the harmful sentencing policies signed into law by her husband, she is not only flip-flopping, but she doesn’t go as far as young voters, and a vast majority of Democrats, want. A strong majority of Democrats support ending cannabis prohibition, and the younger the voter, the greater the support. Unfortunately, the frontrunner doesn’t support legalization and will only move forward with incremental reform, at best.

Bernie Sanders was first to oppose the obscene policy of allowing private prisons profit off of the incarceration of nonviolent offenders, disproportionately the poor and people of color. Senator Sanders has also been correct to criticize Clinton for not supporting marijuana legalization. Sanders has filed a bill to end cannabis prohibition and could make good on his promise using presidential executive authority. While it is great that Clinton followed in Sanders’ footsteps and stated that she would stop taking donations from the private prison lobby, it is clear that she doesn’t have the strong track record of Bernie Sanders.

Big Brother needs to be curtailed

Many Americans are growing more concerned about the lack of privacy protections and the expansion of government surveillance power. Younger voters, perhaps because they are used to living so much of their lives online, are the most alarmed about the pervasive nature of Big Brother. This does not seem to concern Hillary Clinton, who voted for the Patriot Act while Bernie Sanders opposed it.

Additionally, civil liberties are attacked more in times of war and Clinton voted for the Iraq War while Sanders opposed the most disastrous foreign policy folly of our time. Former Secretary Clinton is much more hawkish than Sanders and President Obama, even calling for a no-fly zone in Syria. The former First Lady is much more likely to entangle America in more Middle Eastern quagmires that can further inflame the region and lead to a loss of liberties at home.

Hillary Clinton is not progressive on fracking

Young voters are much more concerned about our environment, one of the reasons legalizing hemp is so important to millennials and many drug law reformers. On the environment, Senator Sanders is also the clear progressive on the Democratic side. Sanders has called climate change the most important threat of our time and has called for a ban on fracking. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, just left Iowa to attend a fundraiser by an investment firm with deep investments in the fracking industry, and has not called for an end to fracking.

In fact, as Secretary of State, Clinton helped promote fracking around the globe. Young voters obviously have to live on this planet longer than older voters, so it make sense that they care about the environment the most and a strong majority opposes fracking. On the environment, Senator Sanders is the clear choice.

Bernie Sanders isn’t just the choice of idealists

This election is being billed as a battle between hearts and minds – if Democratic voters choose their hearts, then Sanders wins, while Clinton wins if pragmatists prevail. However, those who use both their hearts and their minds can clearly see that the candidate most in-line with young voters is Bernie Sanders, and not Hillary Clinton. And if you want to be a true realist, choose the candidate that has been shown to poll well against Republican frontrunner Donald Trump and doesn’t have an FBI investigation that continues to linger.

Political junkies like myself were waiting anxiously as the final Des Moines Register Iowa caucus poll was announced this afternoon. The poll is widely respected as having the best grasp on the hard-to-predict Iowa caucus.

Not surprisingly, Donald Trump leads the Republican field, although Ted Cruz is in striking distance of 5 points. I fully expect Trump to secure the GOP nomination as there doesn’t seem to be anything he can do to hurt his standing, from mocking someone with a disability to making racist statements to joking that he can even get away to shooting somebody to skipping the last Fox News debate. Also, not surprising, the Democratic race is too-close to call, with frontrunner Hillary Clinton eking out a 3-point lead 45-42 over Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders.

Turnout, turnout, turnout

Turnout is gonna be key for both parties as both Trump and Sanders are heavily favored by first-time caucus goers. If there is a big turnout, something remotely similar to the 2008 wave that carried Barack Obama to victory, we can expect a Sanders victory speech preceded by a little Simon and Garfunkel. If the 2016 Democratic electorate is just the run-of-the-mill, usual voting bloc, then the establishment wins, not only Iowa, but probably the nomination, and we all brace ourselves that further email scandals or new revelations of a Bill Clinton sex scandal doesn’t swing the presidency to Donald J. Trump.

As political pundits were waiting on the Register’s poll, the Quad-City Times released their endorsement, urging Democrats to caucus for Senator Sanders. Most major newspapers will certainly endorse Clinton, the establishment favorite, and newspaper endorsements are less valuable each and everyday, but this endorsement very articulately sums up what many of us Sanders supporters are feeling–that Sanders is a continuation of the “hope and change” of the Barack Obama campaign while Hillary Clinton is the Washington status quo of the Obama Administration.

The Obama Administration has been okay, for many of us, and a continuation of gridlock and incremental change is better than taking steps backward, but we can do better. We are still believing in a campaign that believes in “Yes We Can” (or “Bern it Up“) and reject a campaign of “Never, Ever“.

Good judgment trumps experience

I have some good friends and many people that I respect endorsing Hillary Clinton. These good folks usual rely upon Clinton’s experience, I just respectfully disagree that her experience shows that she would be the right president to win this general election and to lead our country.

While much is made of Hillary Clinton’s experience, the Quad-City Times Editorial Board rightfully brings up recent issues where Senator Sanders was on the right side of history while Clinton was on the wrong side: the war in Iraq, the Patriot Act and the Wall Street bailout. For good measure, the paper could also have mentioned Clinton’s flip flops on marriage equality, the Keystone XL pipeline and the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, all issues that Sanders has consistently been in line with progressive values and the base of the Democratic Party.

More from the Quad-City Times endorsement:

Clinton told us she can get things done, thanks to relationships built with Republicans. Sanders, she argues, can’t, because his rhetoric is too extreme. However, a Clinton presidency would likely mirror that of President Barack Obama. Democrats aren’t taking back the House anytime soon. Clobbering the Clintons has been the pastime of House Republicans for decades. Gridlock is the only result of years of disdain, mistrust and wasteful congressional investigations.

***

In 2008, voters rejected Clinton for what they thought was a new era of political discourse. Obama has had his moments, for sure. But his supporters didn’t get the new-century paradigm shift they desired. The corporatism persisted. Special interests and the wealthy continue to own Washington. Clinton is incapable of changing that. She’s just too plugged in.

If the Democratic Party is to move forward, it must abandon its compromised policy and differentiate itself come November. Only Sanders can accomplish that goal.

There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton has experience, but Bernie Sanders has demonstrated better judgment, not just on social issues, but also on the biggest foreign policy vote of our time. Like Sen. Sanders has stated, Dick Cheney has plenty of experience as well. Judgement matters and Sen. Sanders has been on the right side of history on a whole host of issues and actually has plenty of experience himself, even as an executive, something that Hillary Clinton doesn’t have.

Yes, Bernie Sanders lacks the foreign policy experience of Clinton as it is hard to compete with a former Secretary of State, but what good is experience when you support quagmires in the Middle East that have destabilized our globe and created terrorist groups like ISIS? Hillary Clinton’s hawkish foreign policy, to the right of President Obama, should definitely give anti-war voters pause.

Let’s give change another shot, folks

Hopefully, Iowa caucus goers will choose the candidate who has demonstrated better judgement on domestic policy, civil rights, criminal justice and matters of war and peace. Iowa voters gave us hope eight years ago, here’s hoping that they don’t settle for the status quo in 2016. Hopefully, Hawkeye voters give us another shot at true change, from ending cannabis prohibition to providing healthcare for all to avoiding another ill-fated Middle Eastern quagmire.

Iowa Democratic caucus voters have a huge burden on their shoulders as they decide who they will caucus for on Monday. Will they choose Bernie Sanders’ hopeful message of change or Hillary Clinton’s pragmatic realism (or is it political cynicism)? Iowa chose change in 2004, and despite the many unfulfilled promises of the Obama campaign, I urge Iowa voters to choose change again and caucus for Bernie Sanders, who has been surging in the polls, but it is looking too close to call at the moment Yes, Bernie is better on marijuana, but he also is the candidate we need to curtail the massive influence of corporate interests and to topple the political monster that is Donald Trump.

Of course I #FeelTheBern over Bernie’s marijuana and Drug War policies

I love Bernie Sanders’ Drug War policies, but I don’t know of anyone that votes on just one issue.  Hell, if I only looked at marijuana legalization, there is reason to believe that Donald Trump could even be better on the issue than Hillary Clinton, but I want nothing to do with Donald Trump as leader of the free world.

Of course, Senator Sanders is the best mainstream candidate on drug policy as he has spoken a lot about the need to reform our drug laws and has even introduced a bill that would de-schedule marijuana from the list of controlled substances, effectively ending the federal marijuana prohibition. Sanders has also introduced legislation that would eliminate private federal prisons as it is obscene that big businesses would be able to profit off of locking up nonviolent drug offenders.

Hillary Clinton likely won’t be terrible on marijuana and it is safe to assume that she would continue the very pragmatic approach followed by President Obama. However, it is clear that Clinton won’t advocate for legalizing marijuana. While she supports moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule II, that is merely an incremental step and is a much more tepid move than what a majority of Americans want (and a super majority of the Democratic Party supports).

America needs a candidate that isn’t influenced by big-money interests

It is clear that Bernie Sanders is a more progressive candidate on limiting the perverse influence of money over our political system. Hillary Clinton is simply too beholden to many wealthy donors, from Goldman Sachs to the many rich folks forking out the maximum $2,700 donation to her campaign to those funneling in dark money into her Super PAC (run by the despicable David Brock). No matter the issue most important to you, the influence of money hurts your cause (unless your cause is to perpetuate income inequality and advance the financial power of the 1%).

An Anni Karni Politico story out today discusses how many big Clinton backers would be willing to support a Michael Bloomberg independent campaign over Sanders if he bests Clinton for the Democratic nomination:

That her supporters see themselves more in line with a billionaire independent puts Clinton in a tight spot — those backers are important allies for Clinton, many of them longtime personal friends. But as textbook one-percenters, they are potentially political poison in Iowa, where Sanders’ most potent line of attack on Clinton has been highlighting her paid speeches in front of Goldman Sachs, and her personal connections to Wall Street.

On Wednesday night, Sanders criticized Clinton for leaving town to attend a fundraiser at Franklin Square Capital Partners in Philadelphia.

“My opponent is not in Iowa tonight,” he pointed out, drawing loud boos from the crowd. “She is raising money from a Philadelphia investment firm. Frankly, I’d rather be here with you.” On Thursday, he released a new ad attacking Goldman Sachs for injecting “millions in campaign contributions and speaking fees” into politics.

The fact that Hillary Clinton would attend a fundraiser with a financial investment firm just a few days before the Iowa caucus really brings home why Senator Sanders should be the nominee. Whether you believe that Clinton is too beholden to rich donors or not, leaving Iowa to attend a lavish fundraiser hosted by Franklin Square Capital Partners, a $17 billion investment fund, is just terrible politics. Which leads us to the real reason that Iowa Democrats should support Senator Sanders over Hillary Clinton: Clinton could very likely lose the general election to Donald Trump.

Clinton’s scandals could give us President Donald J. Trump

This year, Americans are craving some authenticity and a candidate that isn’t controlled by corporate special interests. In 2016, voters are tired as politics as usual and Hillary Clinton is politics as usual and Trump will call her on it again and again. I wish that I couldn’t foresee Donald Trump beating Hillary Clinton in Florida, Ohio and Missouri and winning the Electoral College (even if he doesn’t win the popular vote), but I certainly do.

Clinton’s scandals, both past and present and of her own doing and her husband’s, will be brought up again and again by Donald Trump. Most candidates wouldn’t bring up Juanita Broaddrick in a debate with Hillary Clinton, but Trump will. And Monica Lewinsky, Kathleen Wiley and Gennifer Flowers. And the $850,000 payout to Paula Jones. Of course, Hillary shouldn’t have to pay for Bill’s transgressions, but these scandals could very well cut into her strength as a defender of women.

I hope Bill Clinton starts talking about women’s issues so that voters can see what a hypocrite he is and how Hillary abused those women!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 2, 2016

Like Bernie, we are all sick and tired of hearing about Hillary Clinton’s damn emails, the scandal keeps on going and going and keeps looking worse and worse, with 22 emails on her private server deemed “top secret” and the State Department delaying the release of the final batch of emails. It is certainly safe to assume that, at best, the final batch of emails will cause more political headaches for Clinton. At worst, Hillary Clinton could get indicted.

While I have a hard time seeing the Obama Justice Department prosecuting Hillary Clinton, I can envision someone on her staff being prosecuted, and that being enough to tip the scales towards a President Donald J. Trump administration. (I shudder as I type those words.) Most of the polls show that Bernie Sanders beats Trump by bigger margins than Clinton, and I’m not surprised considering the mood of the country.

Senator Sanders cannot be tied to any corporate overlord or political scandal. Like Trump, Sanders is seen as being authentic, but unlike Trump he has had a solid set of beliefs for decades, not flip-flopping on virtually every major social issue in an obvious attempt to win political points with primary voters.

The conventional wisdom has been that Hillary Clinton, scandals and all, is the better general election candidate, but this isn’t a conventional campaign; otherwise, we wouldn’t even be thinking about Donald Trump as the GOP nominee. As much as I support legalizing marijuana, the number one reason that I support Bernie Sanders is because he can beat the billionaire bully head-to-head. Senator Sanders likely cannot win the Democratic nomination without winning Iowa. Help us Iowa caucus voters: you’re our only hope.

Congressmen Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) certainly don’t see eye-to-eye on every issue, but marijuana legalization is one topic that brings them together. Representative Rohrabacher, a conservative with a libertarian bent, represents Republican Orange County, while Rep. Blumenauer’s constituents hail from progressive Portland, a city that George Bush once deemed “Little Beirut.” The two popular officials (both win re-election by large margins) are joining forces to support marijuana legalization at the International Cannabis Business Conference in San Francisco.

This historic event, which includes a keynote address from former Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders, is being held at the Hyatt Regency over Valentine’s Day on February 13-14. I, along with many of us here at Marijuana Politics, are proud to help organize the ICBC.

Too often, our national political system is gridlocked as our two major parties find it very difficult to work together. The hyper-partisanship that exists puts even the most common sense solutions out of our reach as it seems that neither party wants to pass any bill that will allow the other party to declare a victory.

As marijuana law reform passes across the nation, more and more elected officials are finally seeing that sensible cannabis law reforms are a bipartisan issue. Conservatives, moderates and liberals can come together to support personal freedom, social justice and economic opportunities by ending cannabis prohibition. Republicans like tax cuts and often follow the lead of anti-tax activist Grover Norquist. Well, Grover Norquist supports 280E tax reform, a move that will allow state-regulated cannabis businesses to deduct expenses just as any other business. Everyone supports safer neighborhoods, and denying banking options for state-licensed marijuana businesses puts innocent people at risk across the nation (not to mention cash-only businesses make tax evasion easier).

Two mainstream members of Congress joining forces for a panel on marijuana legalization is truly an important day for reform. As California looks to legalize marijuana for all adults this November and several more states improve their marijuana laws this year, the work of Congressmen Rohrabacher and Blumenauer on the issue is simply invaluable. Both of these great public servants should be commended and I hope a ton of people join them at the ICBC to help learn about the important work being done both locally and federally and how we can all best work together to finally end the failed and harmful policy of cannabis prohibition.

Tickets for the ICBC are still available, but hurry before they sell out. Discounted hotel rooms at the Hyatt end this Tuesday. 

The full press release issued by Congressman Dana Rohrabacher about this historic event:

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Ken Grubbs, 202.225.0145

January 27, 2016

For Immediate Release — Wednesday January 27th

To set up interviews with Blumenauer, call Nicole L’Esperance at 202-225-4811 or email nicole.lesperance@mail.house.gov.

To set up interviews with Rohrabacher, call Ken Grubbs at 202-225-2415

Republican, Democratic congressmen team up for marijuana legalization

WASHINGTON — Two U.S. congressmen — a conservative Republican and a progressive Democrat — are teaming up in California to advocate marijuana legalization.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-CA, and Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-OR, will share the stage at the International Cannabis Business Conference in San Francisco Feb. 13-14.

Rohrabacher will discuss his battle to stop the federal government continuing to shut down California dispensaries.

“I co-authored the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment to stop overzealous federal weed warriors from raiding law-abiding medical marijuana shops,” he said, “but we can’t stop there.”

Blumenauer intends to tell the crowd that full legalization has been successful in his state of Oregon and that California stands to benefit from an overhaul of the state’s pot laws.

“In Oregon, fewer people are being arrested for minor marijuana offenses, tax money is being collected, and police are more focused on stopping violent criminals,” Blumenauer said. “California can have that, too. Legalization works.”

Although none of the various legalization measures vying for California’s November ballot have qualified yet, Blumenauer said it’s important for advocacy champions, law enforcement, and citizens to join the conversation about a more sensible approach to marijuana laws. Marijuana arrests in California havefallen in recent years, but thousands of people still face penalties for possession.

“Lives are still being ruined by the war on marijuana, even as individual states blaze the trail by regulating and legalizing,” Blumenauer said. “California has the largest population in the country, and passing reform here will accelerate the national movement.”

Both congressmen are longtime champions of marijuana reform and have been advocating change in federal marijuana laws for more than 30 years.

“We’re lucky they are on our side and thrilled to have them at the conference,” said International Cannabis Business Conference producer Alex Rogers.

California has a $1.3 billion marijuana market, the largest in the U.S., and legal marijuana is the fastest growing industry in the country, according to The ArcView Group, a cannabis industry investment and research firm. Newly-passed medical regulations are transforming the state’s industry, and San Francisco has begun crafting recreational rules in anticipation of full legalization.

###

 

The Democratic political establishment has gone into full panic mode as anti-establishment candidate Bernie Sanders surged past Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire and pulled within striking range in Iowa. We can certainly count on more ridiculous hyperbole coming out of the Clinton machine now that the latests CNN/WMUR polls have Senator Sanders up a whopping 27 points in the Granite State and a strong 8 points in the Hawkeye State. Establishment politicians and operatives, including Chelsea Clinton, started spouting dangerous political nonsense that they will want to walk back if Senator Sanders wins the nomination.

Strangely, Clinton backers, including the former First Lady’s daughter, falsely accused Sanders of supporting a plan that would “take away health insurance for low-income and middle-income working Americans.” After that didn’t work, then entrenched Democrats, including a couple from my birth state of Missouri, started playing the “socialism” card, a card better-suited for right-wing Republicans, as many Democratic primary voters understand that some of America’s most popular programs, namely Social Security and Medicare, are socialist policies. In fact, more Democratic Iowa caucus goers consider themselves socialist than capitalist.

After the socialism scare tactics didn’t derail, Sanders’ momentum, the mudslinging David Brock, the leader of a pro-Clinton Super PAC, ridiculously trotted out the race card after Sanders’ new “America” ad hit the airwaves. Brock, who once was a right-wing mudslinger that denigrated Anita Hill and claimed that Arkansas State Troopers arranged sexual liaisons for then-Governor Bill Clinton, is now a poltical hatchet man that Hillary Clinton should be embarrassed to have as an operative.

We can expect the establishment to continue to freak out. Some members of the Clinton campaign and Democratic power players have tried to put up a brave face, claiming confidence that the front-runner’s strong support from people of color will provide a firewall in Nevada, South Carolina and more diverse states across the map. However, strong victories in Iowa and New Hampshire could swing many more voters into Sanders’ camp, as Representative Clyburn has stated to The New York Times:

Mr. Clyburn, who is not endorsing a candidate before his state’s primary, said Clinton aides in South Carolina had expressed misgivings to him about the state of her campaign.

“It has to do with what things ought to be done and when they ought to be done,” Mr. Clyburn said, declining to provide more details. “The reality is, if Mrs. Clinton loses Iowa and New Hampshire, that could create new and real problems for her here.”

The actions of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic establishment clearly show that they are now very nervous. Secretary Clinton was the inevitable nominee in 2008 and many are seeing parallels to 2016. It was once unthinkable that a first-term African-American senator with the middle name Hussein could defeat Hillary Clinton. Iowa helped propel Barack Obama to the Democratic nomination in 2008, even though Clinton came back to win in New Hampshire. If Bernie Sanders can exceed the early performance of Barack Obama and win both Iowa and New Hampshire, his long history of being on the right side of history on the Civil Rights Movement, women’s rights, gay rights and matters of war and peace, will bring along more and more voters, including those of color, to #FeelTheBern.

Needless to say, new California medical marijuana regulations will have dramatic impact upon the community and industry. The California Assembly, planning on a legalization market for all adults, decided to preemptively pass medicinal regulations. Sensible regulations put in place can definitely help voters agree upon increasing a regulated market to include all adults.

How can advocates best ensure that small businesses that have been great actors, and patients, don’t get left behind? How many more regulations will be added once the state legalizes cannabis for all adults? These are just some of the questions that the California cannabis community must grapple with. The International Cannabis Business Conference (ICBC) is bringing together a panel consisting of California Assembly Member Rob Bonta, business attorney Nicole Howell Neubert and David McPherson, principal of HDL (a company that represents more than 160 California cities and counties) and a past president of California Municipal Revenue & Taxation Association. The panel will be moderated by Oaksterdam University’s Dale Sky Jones.

For the immediate needs of the cannabis community, no panel may be more important than the ICBC’s “California Regulations” panel. The expertise of the group of experts will prove invaluable to the current regulatory situation facing the cannabis industry, while also providing insight into future changes and how concerned citizens can advocate for any needed changes that can best ensure that California mom-and-pops can thrive and patients can continue to have safe access to such an important medicine.

As someone on the front lines of working to ensure that Oregon implements a law that works for all Oregonians, while protecting the needs of patients, I understand the tall task ahead for the California cannabis community. While the job is a huge one, I am confident that Californians are up to the challenge and am pleased to help organize a conference that will provide very important information for those that have to navigate current and future regulatory hurdles.

(Featured photo credit: Laurie Avocado)

Bernie Sanders campaign has long been ridiculed by the political establishment and even by some fellow progressives. Well, they can stop laughing now. The Vermont Senator’s remarkable climb in the polls has crescendoed to unprecedented heights in the latest CNN/WMUR poll that has the anti-establishment candidate defeating frontrunner Hillary Clinton 60% to 33%, a whopping 27% that has got to shock the political establishment at least as much as it shocks me, one of Sanders’ biggest supporters.

This latest New Hampshire poll, conducted before Sunday night’s debate in South Carolina, while stunning, follows a recent trend that has seen Sanders gaining on the former First Lady in Iowa, New Hampshire and nationally. The previous CNN/WMUR poll, which found Sanders ahead with 50% of the vote to Clinton’s 40%, was conducted in late November/early December. Former Secretary of State Clinton has usually enjoyed a polling bump following previous debates, but most consider the last debate the strongest performance by Sanders yet, and many, even those in the mainstream media, declaring him the winner.

While the Clinton campaign has often stressed electability as a core reason Democratic voters should nominate her, many polls have Bernie Sanders outperforming Clinton in head-to-head matchups with likely Republican nominees, especially GOP frontrunner Donald Trump. The CNN/WMUR poll shows Sanders trouncing Clinton among independent voters by 45%. Strong support from independents is likely one of the reasons he polls very favorably when matched up against Donald Trump. CNN reports:

Those undeclared voters are critical to Sanders’ support: 70% in the new poll say they plan to vote for him, 25% Clinton. Among registered Democrats, it’s 50% Sanders to 41% Clinton. Still, that represents an increase for Sanders among registered Democrats. The December poll found him trailing Clinton, 47% to 40%, among that group.

***

Sanders also has astonishingly high favorability ratings among those likely to vote in New Hampshire’s Democratic primary, and is broadly seen as the candidate with the “personal characteristics and qualities that you think a president should have.”

Overall, 91% say they have a favorable view of Sanders, while just 2% have an unfavorable opinion. That’s improved since December, when 83% had a positive take on the neighboring state’s senator. Almost 6-in-10 say they see Sanders as the more presidential candidate in the field, compared to 33% for Clinton.

It certainly appears that the political establishment has underestimated the progressive base of the Democratic Party. American voters aren’t just sick and tired of hearing about Hillary Clinton’s damn emails, they are tired of politics as usual. Bernie Sanders is merely the vessel for voters that have been hungry for political change, but he is a political figure that has long been on the right side of major political battles, such as civil rights and matters of war and peace.

Today, when Bernie Sanders discusses our rigged economic and political systems, and the fact that climate change is an existential threat that must be tackled head on, millions and millions of people, beyond just the usual liberal base, are flocking to his campaign. Many American voters are realizing that the time is now for a unique candidate that is more than just a politician, but someone helping lead a political revolution to fundamentally change a system controlled by the 1%. The revolution may not be televised, but it might be hastagged: #FeelTheBern.

(Featured photo credit: Joe Raedle / Getty Images)

Political victories are easy to see, but there are often underlying cultural events that shape our progress.  Spannabis, one of the world’s leading cannabis festivals, is an example in Spain. Most of the cannabis community is likely unaware that tens of thousands of revelers attend the event every year, making the event one of the largest cannabis festivals in the world. Spannabis helps bring the European cannabis community together and help promote tolerant, progressive attitude across the continent.

The success and growth of the Seattle Hempfest is an example of such an event having a cultural impact in the United States. Many cannabis law reformers around the world were certainly unaware of Hempfest, especially before it grew into a massive event, but it isn’t a coincidence that Seattle and Washington State have been progressive on cannabis policy compared to most of the U.S.

As we become a more connected society, political and cultural developments in other countries increase in importance as their impact is felt beyond a country’s borders. Cannabis law reform and culture are no different. Positive marijuana momentum in Mexico and Canada influence the debate in the United States and U.S. drug policy definitely impacts the rest of the world.

Raul del Pino, the communications director for Spannabis, will be coming to San Francisco to present at the International Cannabis Business Conference (ICBC) on February 13-14. Raul will share the latest on developments in Spain and will add to a conference that is working to continue our movement’s momentum around the world. It was an honor and a privilege to have Raul answer some questions ahead of the conference.

How long have you considered yourself a cannabis law reform advocate? What brought you into the movement?

Since 1996 I have been interested in Cannabis thanks to my interest in the studies of psychoactive substances. From that that time I adopted a critical attitude toward the prohibition of drugs, especially marijuana, from the viewpoint of personal freedom.

When did Spannabis begin? How many events have been held?

The first Spannabis event occurred in 2002 in Barcelona. Since then we have held the event 12 times and next March (2016) we will hold the 13th.

How many people have attended over the years?

The number of attendees over the years has grown exponentially, and notably each year we surpass the attendance of the previous year. Last year we had close to 35,000 attendees from many different countries, and 3,000 attendees are licensed professionals in addition to over 500 businesses were represented.

Last year we noted an impressive increase in exhibitors and attendees from the United States, thus spannabis has become this platform to launch a multitude of products and businesses.

We believe that our success on the international level makes Spannabis one of the largest and most important Cannabis Fairs in the world.

Can you describe your work for the event?

Hmmm…It’s hard to say exactly what I do because there are so many things going on. An event of this kind requires a work team that is well coordinated and one that has been working for months preparing for the event. As for me, I am in charge of everything to do with things digital and new technologies, like dealing with the means of communication. During the exhibition my main job is to deal with the press, as well as helping coordinate various events, really there are many different issues that I am dealing with.

How is cannabis treated in Spain?

Spain is a country with a very old cannabis culture, due to our location which is so close to Morocco, the largest producer of Hashish in the world, which was an old  colony of Spain. So it is a illegal drug that is accepted socially. Also given our climate we can grow lots of crops so Spain has never lacked hashish and marijuana.

Because it has been socially acceptable  for a long time, and the spanish law has no criminal penalty for consuming or possessing drugs, thus the consuming of drugs in the privacy of your home is legal. Also there are many pro-cannabis groups and the the ambiguity of the spanish law has given rise to Cannabis Social Clubs, but these are not great times for them, now they are being criminally prosecuted and there have been cases that some members of the clubs have gone to jail and the closure of some and lots of fear among the club members.

Does there seem to be movement improving the law?

These days we are waiting for a new government to be formed after the elections in december. The situation right now is very confusing because we don’t know what party or parties will form the new government. Some of them are pro marijuana legalization.

How is the United States cannabis law perceived in Spain? 

The US is originator of the prohibition of drugs throughout the world, and was the first country to prohibit marijuana, as well as industrial hemp. The paradox we find ourselves in is that now the US has begun to decriminalize marijuana in some states. we have a shred of hope that if US legalizes soon after the rest of the world will follow. At any rate we are dealing with contradictory  laws.

Are advocates and industry members keeping tabs on developments in states like Colorado that have now legalized cannabis? Or the fact that other states, like California, are likely to legalize in 2016 and coming years?

As I told you, in Spain we are paying attention to what is going in the US regarding the legalization of Cannabis, for sure this will influence legalization in Spain and other countries, in addition to that the industry in the US and Spain is more and more involved with the other, which looks like in the coming years good business opportunities for both countries.

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has always dominated the unscientific online polls and done well in many focus groups that have asked debate viewers who won the Democratic primary debates. However, the mainstream political pundits and talking heads have overwhelmingly declared Hillary Sanders the winner. Following last night’s debate in South Carolina, Sanders again won the online polls and a prominent focus group of undecided voters. One major difference this time around–many prominent commentators declared Bernie Sanders the winner.

While I have been unabashedly a big fan of Senator Sanders, I have had to acknowledge that Hillary Clinton’s debate performances have been extremely strong. Regardless of how you feel about the former First Lady, it is obvious that she is extremely smart, is very knowledgeable on every political issue and is a formidable debate opponent. Hillary Clinton has gone toe-to-toe with Barack Obama and has a ton of experience on the pressure-filled national stage.

Many Sanders’ supporters have complained about the limited number of debates and the fact that the debates have been scheduled during inconvenient times on weekends and around some holidays and major sporting events. I have come to believe that Hillary Clinton’s performances in debates were so strong that the Democratic establishment had made a mistake in scheduling very few debates as the debates accentuate the frontrunner’s strengths. To the contrary, the DNC may have had the feeling that the anti-establishment Sanders would gain confidence as he got more national debates under his belt.

Last night’s debate was certainly Sen. Sanders best showing yet and if he continues to improve in debates, he will only become a bigger danger to the so-called “inevitable” Democratic establishment candidate. Bernie Sanders has already captured the hearts and minds of the progressive base of the Democratic Party and has been climbing in the polls, especially in Iowa and New Hampshire, while being dismissed by many mainstream political pundits. If the mainstream media continues to acknowledge the strength of the Sanders campaign, he may just pull off one of the biggest political upsets of all time.

As the Democratic candidates square off in a debate tonight in South Carolina, polls have shown that the race has been tightening in Iowa and New Hampshire, and potentially even nationally. Frontrunner Hillary Clinton has been expected to win the Iowa caucus, but recent polls show that she is in a neck-and-neck race with Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. Senator Sanders, benefitting from his close proximity to New Hampshire, has long polled well in the Granite State, but some polls have shown a commanding lead for the establishment candidate.

Senator Sanders has based his campaign upon the need for a political revolution that strips the political power from billionaires and corporate interests, while Clinton has coined herself as a “progressive that gets things done”, very much stressing her general election strength as a major reason to support her candidacy. Countering Clinton’s “electability” argument, Sanders has emphasized the enthusiasm of his base of support and the fact that he often polls better than Clinton against many of the Republican candidates, especially GOP frontrunner Donald Trump.

Bernie Sanders outpolls Trump by 15 points, while Clinton leads the leading GOP candidate by 10 points in the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. This polling result matches previous polls that show Sanders actual the better general election candidate, particularly when pitted up against the right-wing insurgent candidate. There seems to be an anti-establishment sentiment widely felt by 2016 voters and Trump could launch many of the same attacks against Clinton that he has made against Republican challengers regarding ties to special corporate interests; those same attacks won’t work against Bernie Sanders.

Bernie Sanders has already changed the Democratic debate around many issues, including marijuana legalization and Drug War reform, and he has already elevated the conversation regarding federal cannabis law reform by introducing a bill to end federal prohibition by removing marijuana from the list of federally controlled substances. While Senator Sanders should already be commended for helping move marijuana legalization into the political mainstream, but nothing will move us more mainstream, at the moment, than Bernie Sanders winning the Democratic nomination, and, of course, the White House in November. Then, the entire nation will really #FeelThe Bern.

(Featured photo credit: Reuters/Larry Downing/Brendan McDermid)

Personally, I have been so happy to see great polling news for Bernie Sanders that has been flooding my social media streams these days, along with crucial endorsements of the Vermont Senator from progressives at Democracy for America, MoveOn.org and The Nation magazine. Sanders surging in Iowa, New Hampshire and nationally has brought out attacks from the Hillary Clinton campaign that are dishonest and right-wing. Surprisingly, a member of the Clinton family came out swinging against Sanders on his 2013 universal healthcare plan and it wasn’t former President Bill Clinton, but daughter Chelsea who wrongly proclaimed that Sanders “would strip millions and millions and millions of people off their health insurance.”

Clinton’s recent attacks have been attacked from all sides

The smear from the Clinton camp seem strange to many Democrats and progressives, even going so far as calling the attacks dirty, terrible and proof that the frontrunner is really a “rotten candidate“. Former Barack Obama adviser David Axelrod stated that, “It’s not really an honest attack, and it’s not something that they should have sent her out to do.” Pat Garofalo, the assistant managing editor for opinion at U.S. News & World Report slams the the smear as a “sliming” that is “blatantly dishonest”.

After mostly ignoring Sanders, these unfair and dishonest attacks have come after recent polls have shown Sanders now leading (or neck-and-neck) in Iowa and winning (if not with a commanding lead) in New Hampshire. Even surprising me, someone that has been praising Sanders for months, are recent polls showing the anti-establishment candidate narrowing the gap in nationally as the former First Lady has previously dominated national polls.

These attacks are really a mistake by the Clinton campaign and I, as someone that is pulling for Sanders to pull off one of the greatest political upsets of all time, welcome them. Democratic primary voters, even those intending to vote for Hillary Clinton, love the fact Bernie Sanders is authentic and sticks to issues that appeal to everyday Americans. Sanders has been very consistent and straightforward on healthcare, just as he has been on marijuana legalization and Drug War reform, during the campaign.

Dishonest smears against the authentic Sanders will only benefit the Vermont Senator

Attacking Sanders from the right on healthcare in a dishonest way plays into some of the worst Clinton traits that have plagued her political career–that she is a calculating politician who is willing to lie to get elected. As a candidate that many voters feel lacks trustworthiness, Clinton is now playing into a Sanders strength on his turf, domestic policy. Hopefully, Hillary Clinton will continue to make these unforced errors as she attempts to run out the clock as the so-called “inevitable” nominee. Sanders has already capitalized in fundraising from these attacks and we will likely see more voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and across the country #FeelTheBern.

Bernie Sanders on NBC: “Clinton Campaign Has Become Very Nervous”

Featured photo credit: AP/Getty

Congressman Blumenauer has been undoubtedly one of our nation’s greatest leaders on cannabis law reform. Not only has Blumenauer been an outspoken champion for sensible marijuana laws, but also an effective policy maker. The progressive Oregon Democrat has reached across the aisle to work with the libertarian-leaning Republican Dana Rohrabacher and has even joined forces with conservative anti-tax icon Grover Norquist to garner more support for reasonable federal marijuana tax laws.

Blumenauer has helped make Oregon a trailblazer on marijuana policy from the time he voted to help make the state the first to decriminalize cannabis to his championing of Measure 91 in 2014, helping the state end cannabis prohibition for all adults by the greatest electoral margin of any state thus far. Now, Representative Blumenauer is making a his calls to end prohibition federally as he calls on President Obama to remove marijuana from the list of controlled substances.

During a time when most people have lost faith in Congress and our political system, good public servants like Representative Blumenauer give me hope. I feel very honored and lucky to be able to cast my vote for this great man. I have found him to be smart, thoughtful and compassionate. Throw in the fact that he has been rated one of our most effective members of Congress, and he is definitely a politician that we can all rally behind and support. I urge everyone to keep up with Congressman Blumenauer and support his efforts.

Here is his open letter in full:

An Open Letter to the President

Dear Mr. President:

A State of the Union speech is a unique opportunity to address Congress and the nation about priorities and accomplishments, as well as to highlight critical issues.

I remember another speech in May 2008 when you spoke to over 70,000 Portlanders. The overwhelming feeling of hope coming from the crowd was palpable.

Tonight, you will undoubtedly reflect on the last seven years. During this time, you fulfilled your promise of systematic change while dealing with the largest economic disaster the United States has seen since the Great Depression and almost unanimous Republican obstruction in Congress. Your actions jumpstarting the economy, reforming health care and Wall Street, and providing critical leadership on climate change will be felt for generations to come.

As you begin your last year in office, I hope there is one more step you take to bring about fundamental change — ending the failed policy of marijuana prohibition and removing marijuana from the list of Controlled Substances.

We both know the prohibition of marijuana has not and will not work. Recent surveys find that 18 million adults used marijuana in the past month — and well over a million use it legally under state laws for medicinal purposes. Despite dire hyperbolic warnings and the threat of citation, arrest, or even prison, all evidence indicates Americans will continue to use marijuana, especially since younger Americans feel even stronger that it ought to be legal. They understand that, while not without risk, marijuana is certainly less dangerous than tobacco — which is legal in every state despite its highly addictive nature and proven deadly consequences. Indeed, if we were scheduling drugs today, tobacco would probably be classified as Schedule I and marijuana would be left off.

I suspect that both your heart and your head tell you ending prohibition is the right thing to do, especially from a civil rights and criminal justice perspective. We’ve undercut respect for the law, wasted law enforcement resources, and more important, wasted lives.

A shocking 620,000 people were arrested for marijuana possession in 2014. No area is more stark and unfair than the treatment of African Americans — particularly young men. Research shows they are no more likely to use marijuana, yet the heavy hand of the law descends upon them with a vengeance. Depending on where they live, African Americans are two to eight times more likely to be arrested for possession of marijuana, according to a study by the ACLU. Unlike white middle class Americans, for young men of color — especially if poor — even a minor infraction can have devastating consequences. They can be forced from their family home if they are living in public housing, or have difficulty obtaining federal student loans to make it nearly impossible to attend college.

This is wrong.

Current federal policy declares marijuana has no medicinal value and implies it is more dangerous than methamphetamine or cocaine. I don’t believe that any member of your Administration believes this is true. Yet inaction creates another serious consequence — an inability to focus on real threats to public health. Cocaine, heroin, methamphetamines, and opioids are all far more dangerous than marijuana. In 2013 alone, over 20,000 people died of prescription drug overdoses — while there have never been any reported marijuana overdose fatalities.

This is also wrong. By telling Americans something demonstrably false, the case and credibility of drug enforcement authorities at all levels is weakened.

Not only that, federal policy has placed a stranglehold on effective marijuana research — even as evidence continues to mount about its medicinal benefits. Medical marijuana patients receive relief of pain, suppression of nausea, and the control of symptoms of neurological disorders. Recognizing this, 23 states, the District of Columbia, and Guam have legalized medical marijuana, and 17 other states have authorized some form of medical marijuana. Removing federal barriers to research will help eliminate the guess work about both its benefits and potential problems.

For all the talk about gateway drugs, having millions of Americans relying on the black market for marijuana only opens the way for thugs to directly market to young people and those desperate to deal with depression and pain. No drug dealer checks for ID on the street corner or schoolyard. They have no license to lose and every incentive to sell other more dangerous, addictive and profitable drugs.

The vast underground network supplying millions of Americans can and should be transformed into a legal industry that is regulated and taxed. We continue to enrich Mexican drug cartels that use marijuana as one of the pillars of their financial model. We should instead be taxing and regulating marijuana to help balance the budget and fund important services. If we approach marijuana the same way as alcohol, we could take the billions of dollars we save in enforcement and additional billions that will be generated in tax revenue to deal with education, the protection of our children, and the treatment for people with addiction problems.

Mr. President, you’ve already had the most profound effect on marijuana law reform than any President in history. You’ve declined to interfere with states that have legalized adult use of marijuana and others states that allow medical marijuana, and you’ve provided breathing room for state-legal marijuana businesses.

It is time, Mr. President, for you to take the next logical step, cementing your legacy in history on drug reform and a fairer criminal justice system. Call for an end to marijuana prohibition and de-schedule marijuana. The House and Senate are reluctant to take bold action to legalize marijuana at the federal level, but you don’t have to wait. Under your leadership by de-scheduling marijuana, you will trigger monumental reform, allowing states to continue their pioneering efforts and putting pressure on Congress to take additional actions to tax and regulate. We can start by ending the lunacy of forcing legal marijuana companies to operate as cash-only. Seldom has such a small step, supported by a majority of Americans, had such potential transformational power.

Please seize the moment. We can’t wait.

The time is now. The country is ready.

In 2008, I joined with tens of thousands of Oregonians who cheered you on chanting, “Yes, we can!”

Today, I speak on behalf of millions of Americans across the country and ask you to support ending the prohibition of marijuana.

We hope you will respond, “Yes, I will.”

Earl Blumenauer
Member of Congress