# Schwarzenegger says Calif. should have pot debate



## mr.greengenes (May 5, 2009)

Schwarzenegger says Calif. should have pot debate


(05-05) 14:49 PDT Davis, Calif. (AP) --

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says it's time for a debate on whether to legalize marijuana, though he says he's not supporting the idea.
More News

    * Source: No charges likely over interrogation memos 05.05.09
    * Calif pageant eyes Prejean for contract violations 05.05.09
    * Teen walks around crossing gate, hit by train 05.05.09
    * Nation's first face transplant patient shows face 05.05.09

Schwarzenegger spoke Tuesday in Davis during an event to promote wildfire safety. He warns against making potentially harmful decisions just to raise money and says some countries that have decriminalized pot have had negative experiences.

Democratic state Assemblyman Tom Ammiano says legalizing marijuana for adults over age 21 and taxing it at $50 per ounce would bring the state more than $1 billion a year. He has a bill in the Legislature but has delayed seeking approval until next year.

California became the first state to legalize the medical use of marijuana in 1996. A dozen other states now have similar laws.


----------



## nvthis (May 5, 2009)

I think they are beginning to feel '_overgrown_'.


----------



## Moto-Man (May 5, 2009)

Guv: Time to consider pot legalization
San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 5, 2009  -  20:00 PDT Sacramento

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said today it is "time for debate" about legalizing marijuana for recreational use in California as support grows nationwide for relaxing pot laws.

The governor's comments came days after a poll of California voters found a majority for the time backing legal marijuana and as a San Francisco legislator aims to regulate and tax marijuana to bring the state up to $1.3 billion a year in extra revenue.

Schwarzenegger was cautious when answering a reporter's question today about whether the state should regulate and tax the substance, saying it was not time to go that far. But, he said, a debate on the issue would be appropriate.

"I think all of those ideas of creating extra revenues - I'm always for an open debate on it," Schwarzenegger said, adding that California should look to the experiences of other nations around the world in relaxing laws on marijuana.

Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, has introduced a bill to regulate marijuana like alcohol, with people over 21 years old allowed to grow, buy, sell and possess cannabis - all of which is barred by federal law.

California voters in 1996 legalized marijuana for medical use with permission from a physician.

Ammiano said he was pleased the governor is "open-minded" on the issue and added that he was sure the two could "hash it out."

Under Ammiano's proposal, the state would impose a $50-an-ounce levy on sales of marijuana, which would boost state revenues by about $1.3 billion a year, according to an analysis by the State Board of Equalization. Betty Yee of San Francisco, who chairs the Board of Equalization, supports the measure.

"This has never just been about money," said Ammiano, who has long supported reforming marijuana laws. "It's also about the failure of the war on drugs and implementing a more enlightened policy. I've always anticipated that there could be a perfect storm of political will and public support, and obviously the federal policies are leaning more toward states' rights."

An ABC News/Washington Post poll last week found 46 percent of Americans favored legalization of small amounts of pot for personal use, double the amount who supported that a decade ago. A Field Poll also released last week found that 56 percent of California voters supported legalizing and taxing marijuana.

In March, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said the federal government would take a softer stance on medical marijuana dispensaries, with drug enforcement agents targeting only those who violate state and federal law. California is one of 13 states that allow marijuana use with a doctor's recommendation.

Many law enforcement organizations oppose changes in marijuana laws. The California Police Chiefs Association, in a report last month, concluded that marijuana dispensaries pose "a clear violation of federal and state law; they invite more crime; and they compromise the health and welfare of law-abiding citizens."

But the head of that association said he, too, is open to a debate on legalizing pot.

"We keep walking around the elephant in the room, which is should marijuana be legal?" said Bernard Melekian, president of the association and chief of police in Pasadena.

The Board of Equalization analysis predicts that legalization would drop the street value of marijuana by 50 percent and increase consumption by 40 percent.

Bruce Mirken, spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project, which advocates legalization, said the governor's comments about marijuana are part of a "tectonic shift" in attitudes toward the issue.

"I think, frankly, the public is going to drag the politicians into doing what is right," he said.

Chronicle staff writer Matthew Yi contributed to this report. E-mail Wyatt Buchanan at [email protected].

hxxp://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/05/MNO617F929.DTL


----------



## Sir_Tokie (May 6, 2009)

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) &#8211; California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said on Tuesday he welcomes a public debate on proposals to legalize and tax marijuana, which some suggest could provide a lucrative new revenue source for the cash-strapped state.

The Republican governor, whose term in office expires at the end of next year, was asked about the idea of treating pot like alcohol at an appearance in northern California to promote wildfire preparedness.

"No, I don't think it's time for that, but I think it's time for a debate," he said. "And I think we ought to study very carefully what other countries are doing that have legalized marijuana and other drugs, what affect it had on those countries, and are they happy with that decision."

The former Hollywood actor, who has admitted smoking marijuana in the past, cited his native Austria as a country where "they want to roll back some of the decisions that were made in European countries."

He said a decision to legalize marijuana, which has been outlawed in the United States since 1937, should not be made on the basis of raising revenues alone.

Schwarzenegger's comments come days after a statewide Field Poll found that 56 percent of California voters support the idea of legalizing cannabis for recreational use and taxing its proceeds.

A bill introduced in the state Legislature by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, a Democrat from San Francisco, would do just that -- permitting taxed sales of marijuana to adults while barring sales to or possession by anyone under age 21. A similar regulatory structure already exists for alcoholic beverages.

Ammiano said his proposal would generate up to $1.3 billion in revenue for the state, which faces another multibillion-dollar budget shortfall just weeks after a landmark deal closing a $42 billion deficit.

He and others who support legalizing pot say such a move also would improve public safety by redirecting law enforcement efforts to more serious crimes and would end environmental damage to public lands used for illicit cannabis cultivation.

But in 2004, Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill that would have eased rules on how much medical marijuana patients can possess in California.

Voters in California, the nation's most populous state, became the first to approve the use of marijuana for medical purposes in 1996, putting the state at odds with federal law.

Under the Bush administration federal agents stepped up raids against medical marijuana dispensaries in California and other states that have passed similar laws.

But U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said in March that the Justice Department under President Barack Obama has no plans to prosecute such dispensaries in those states in the future. However, Obama, who also has acknowledged smoking pot in his younger days, recently dismissed the idea of legalizing marijuana on a national level.


----------



## Shockeclipse (May 6, 2009)

"I think, frankly, the public is going to drag the politicians into doing what is right," he said.


umm....Isn't that what they should do.....on their own?


----------



## SPEARCHUCKER (May 7, 2009)

They had a segment on Lou Dobbs about him tonight. Showed him puffin a J back in the 70s infront the media. Then said he has toked with Tommy Chong a few times before.  Had me rollin.

Replay is on right now. But if someone wanted to set their Tivo and catch it. Lou replays at 4am on CNN.

I think with his popularity rating at 33% and just 18 months left on this term. Things might get pushed along pretty fast to make people happy.


----------



## NYC_Diesel x Jack_Herer (May 7, 2009)

With Arnold's approval rating in the crapper, and the majority of Californians supporting the legalization of marijuana, he is playing to the masses.  He said it is time for a debate, not legalization.  There is NO WAY marijuana will be completely legalized,taxed, and sold like cigarettes, no chance.  The tobacco industry, the liquor industry, and the thousands of people the US employes in the War on Marijuana will ensure marijuana stays illegal in this country for a LONG LONG time.  
I don't want to sound like the party pooper, but marijuana has been illegal for as long as it has simply because there is no money behind the cause.  There is no marijuana "lobby".  There is however timber, paper, liquor, and tobacco industries that would be willing to throw millinos against the legalization of marijuana.  Business controls the US, not the people.  This is why even thought the majority of California's citizens want it legalized, it is still illegal.  We are a democracy in name only.  And for every dollar that is raised to support the legalization of marijuana, big business will raise $100 to fight it.


----------



## NorCalHal (May 7, 2009)

NYC_Diesel x Jack_Herer said:
			
		

> There is no marijuana "lobby".


 
You are incorrect my friend, it is called NORML.

Aside from the Feds, MMJ is pretty much legal here in Cali. You can grow it, sell it, and smoke it, with no fear of State LEO coming down on you, as long as you are within reason.
Lets say the Bill passes. We are in the same boat, imo. 
Nothing will really change except the Market will get bigger. And, the Grow ops will get WAY BIGGER.
But, federaly, it will still be "illegal". So, really, nothing will change imo.


----------



## NorCalHal (May 7, 2009)

NYC_Diesel x Jack_Herer said:
			
		

> And for every dollar that is raised to support the legalization of marijuana, big business will raise $100 to fight it.


 

Incorrect statement, and no man, not tryin' to bash u bro. 

Here is a fact about Proposition 215, which legalized Medical Marijuana in Cali.



> Mourners over the success of 215 point out that opponents were vastly outspent. Yes, but we are talking nickels and dimes. Supporters of the reform raised $1.8 million, which in California politics is barely enough to squeeze in your middle initial. Opponents spent $28,000.



I MUST say though, that one of the reasons stated was that opponents didn't really need to raise too much loot, be cause News coverage gave them the platform to speak out against it. But as far as monies raised, we kicked thier butt.


----------



## cubby (May 7, 2009)

A debate concerning legalization is most certainly over due. I can't help but wonder, if, at the end of the "debate" the citizens of California decided that the benifits of legalization far outwiegh the costs would the same politicians who currently promote "states rights" maintain thier stances, or would they support the federal government overriding the California electorates informed decision.
Californians may not realize it, but your fight is not only with conservatives in your state ( and lets face it, a California conservative is a moderate anywhere else) but also those in such backwards states as Alabama, Georgia, ect,ect,ect.
At the end of the day though, it's a debate worth having, a fight worth fighting, and fair and equitable result will follow.
When legalization opponents from outside the state get involved, those of us out side California who support legalization, even if we live outside California, must be willing to help. We must encourage our legislators to oppose federal intervention in states rights issues.
Legalization in California will benifit us all.


----------



## meds4me (May 7, 2009)

NorCalHal said:
			
		

> You are incorrect my friend, it is called NORML.
> 
> Aside from the Feds, MMJ is pretty much legal here in Cali. You can grow it, sell it, and smoke it, with no fear of State LEO coming down on you, as long as you are within reason.
> Lets say the Bill passes. We are in the same boat, imo.
> ...


 
I agree. i saw barney frank on this morin and he said the same ting. Only it will remove peeps from the "system". Legal, no . But decriminalized : Yes ! Youre still going to grow it or buy it !!


----------



## houseoftreasure (May 7, 2009)

Does no-on havfe issue with increasing the cost 50 bucks a Z? I am already paying 150 bucks for a half an ounce, you want it to now go to $175 making a $350 ounce? And I aint even getting the spendy here. AND I AM IN OREGON! home of the most varied and largest number of producers in the country. (possible second to cali, depending on when your numbers are/were published)

$50 bucks an ounce in ridiculous. These numbers MUST be re thought and re rationalized and re considered, as well as the decriminalization reducing the PUBLIC cost of general access pot. ALOT! more than half! The cost MUST come down. Or the taxing will tax out many of the "legal" purchase points. as all the taxes are doing to tobbacco. I have finnally given up the ghost on tobbacco for the taxes have simply cost me out it. in two weeks the cost of a tin of Zig Zag tobbacco went from $16 to $37. I can buy a carton of pre rolled for that. I quit smoking prerolls cause I couldn't aford them, now, I cant afford to roll my own either.

With a $50 per ounce taxing... LEGAL purchase points will price them selves out of revenue. Just a thunk.

_him


----------



## NYC_Diesel x Jack_Herer (May 7, 2009)

NorCalHal, no offense, but NORML has not really done much.  It has been there to assist in the fight the whole time, but as far as results go (and no offense to those with NORML) it doesn't really get many.  If the goal is full legalization of marijuana and HEMP, to date they have failed in every state.  
My main point was that the legalization of marijuana is much more of a political issue than people realize.  It isn't just a matter of people wanting it to be legal.
Case in point, look at Hemp.  Hemp can not be smoked, it does not get you high, and it is not a danger in any way for abuse.  Yet it is still illegal in the United States.....Why?  Because the timber and paper industries have spent millions over decades keeping it illegal.  There is no reason for it to be illegal.  It could be farmed for literally thousands of purposes although I am sure that I do not have to tell you that. 
  So here we sit, with a substance that is illegal even though it is harmless simply because many companies have a financial interest in it not becomming legal.  Even though growing it would help the eceonomy, even though growing it would help with deforestation, even though no one can smoke it or get high from it, even though it is not a danger in any way, it is illegal simply because the financial interests of some companies depend on it staying illegal.
  Now consider how many MORE people depend on marijuana staying illegal and how many people have an interest in keeping it illegal...  There are entire branches of the government, thousands of DEA, border control, and drug agents, hundreds of liquor and alcohol companies that don't want competition, lawyers that want more clients to defend, tobacco companies that have an interest in fewer smokable products being sold at registers, port security and coast guard agents....I could go on and on but you get the point.  
  Look, I don't want to be all doom and gloom but consider the above.  NORML and others have fought for the legalization of hemp for decades and have gotten nowhere because of the resistance stated above.  How am I supposed to believe that NORML and those same supporters are going to be able to convince the state to legalize marijuana outright, when they couldn't even do anything for HEMP and the number of people standing against them in this fight will be much larger?  

This is nothing more than Arnold grandstanding because he wants to raise his popularity.  There will be no SERIOUS debate among lawmakers for years to come.


----------



## Shockeclipse (May 7, 2009)

NYC_Diesel x Jack_Herer said:
			
		

> NorCalHal, no offense, but NORML has not really done much.  It has been there to assist in the fight the whole time, but as far as results go (and no offense to those with NORML) it doesn't really get many.
> My main point was that the legalization of marijuana is much more of a political issue than people realize.  It isn't just a matter of people wanting it to be legal.
> Case in point, look at Hemp.  Hemp can not be smoked, it does not get you high, and it is not a danger in any way for abuse.  Yet it is still illegal in the United States.....Why?  Because the timber and paper industries have spent millions over decades keeping it illegal.  There is no reason for it to be illegal.  It could be farmed for literally thousands of purposes although I am sure that I do not have to tell you that.
> So here we sit, with a substance that is illegal even though it is harmless simply because many companies have a financial interest in it not becomming legal.  Even though growing it would help the eceonomy, even though growing it would help with deforestation, even though no one can smoke it or get high from it, even though it is not a danger in any way, it is illegal simply because the financial interests of some companies depend on it staying illegal.
> ...


I do beleive NORML top officials wrote or co-qrote many of the current mmj states bills leading them to become as such.  I could be wrong...


----------



## Sir_Tokie (May 7, 2009)

Did'nt NORML just give the treasury dept. like 14 billion to show them what kind of revenues they could recceive per yr if made legal? And that's just out of Cali they say. Thought I read that some where...take care..


----------



## NYC_Diesel x Jack_Herer (May 8, 2009)

I would like to see a link to that if you have one.  If NORML gave $14 billion to the government to prove a point the heads of NORML nead to be tossed out on the street.  Giving the government $14 billion to teach them a lesson is like giving a 2 year old a cookie and telling it to be quiet for the next 5 years...it ain't gonna happen.  That was $14 billion wasted if they did it.


----------



## cubby (May 8, 2009)

NORMAL did'nt give any money to the government. What they did was provide the gov. with statistical annalysis of the changes in the economy if mj were to be legalized. Among the variables were legal costs associated with investigation, trial costs, incarceration, and interdiction.


----------



## NorCalHal (May 8, 2009)

You have a valid point NYC. And ya man, no offence taken at all.

And yes, the 14 billion dollar check was a mock up of what "could be".

Another fun fact, NORML is now running Legalization commercials around the country, paid for by NORML alone. The first pro weed commercials ever.

NORML did and is a big part of the Medical MJ bills that went thru here in Cali, and are going thru here.
When the MMJ law was first introduced in Cali in 1995, everyone said the same thing" there is no way the Pharm companies will allow this and they are going to throw up big money and stop it". It didn't happen and we got the law passed. I know MANY folks that use WAY less "pills" now because MMJ relieves thier symptons.

I understand your veiw man, but I think "the movement" has outgrown the negitivity that once dominated any topic relating to MJ legalization.
I do agree that we are years away from that, but I think it will happen in my lifetime.

I never thought Cali would be where we are at. A str8 up industry with legal backing on the State level.


----------



## Rockster (May 8, 2009)

I think NORML is an organisation Americans should be proud of.

We've no equivalent in the UK,not even a bad one!

 Good luck America and good luck to all fighting the good fight.


----------



## Sir_Tokie (May 8, 2009)

"And yes, the 14 billion dollar check was a mock up of what "could be" NCH  Thank you for setting me strait on that, now I feel better. But I knew I had seen something about it...take care..


----------

