There is an interesting (and potentially important) change occurring on the ballots of states with tight Senate races. Legalization of marijuana issues are appearing on the ballots in places like Alaska and Oregon and are expected to draw in younger voters. This could be the margin that the Democrats need to reduce their expected losses. However, the Democratic leadership has followed the lead of President Obama in opposing (or at least not supporting) legalization efforts. The result is that the Democrats could benefit from the ballot pull of pot but do not appear to be capitalizing on the prospect.
Brookings Institution expert John Hudak expects an influx of potential young Democratic votes. All that is required is a couple seats to stay blue for the Democrats to keep the Senate — though Joe Biden might have to become a full-time member of the Senate in casting votes on ties. The GOP is widely expected to make gains in both houses but the pot issue could be a game changer in a couple of states. The GOP is counting on Alaska and Oregon.
These type of wedge issues have worked for the GOP with the gay marriage ballot issues in the past. Hudak says however that the Democrats are missing this “real opportunity” to use pot at the polls.
They seem to be trying to have it both ways in a political version of Bill Clinton insisting that he tried marijuana but “I didn’t inhale.”
“Those who have asserted here that only blue states are permissive of marijuana legalization are not aware of one reality.” Darren I consider to be a blue state. Democrats have carried the state in the presidential elections for as long as I can remember. The state senate is democratic as is the governor. Both senators are as is the majority of congress people. A blip on the radar does not change the facts.
This article brings up an interesting thought. The parties have long stood that they have to appeal to the younger voter to gain seats in the various legislatures and executives. Now, it is not the case generally on this issue.
Those who have asserted here that only blue states are permissive of marijuana legalization are not aware of one reality. In Washington after the passage of the legalization initiative the Republicans in the legislature, especially in Eastern Washington were more open to the idea of fostering production facilities and in fact they were more so opposed to the stifling of the Medical Marijuana sector. A bill that would have essentially destroyed the Medical Marijuana service was sponsored by a Democrat. Fortunately this bill died before it went further.
So why the reason to kill the Medical Marijuana sector? Two main reasons. First Taxation. (of course) Medical Marijuana from dispensaries is only taxed at the sales tax rate for that locality. Recreational weed is taxed at extortionate levels. Many politicians are hungry for more tax revenue and want to kill what they perceive as being less revenue generating. The other is that the feds are breathing down the neck of the state wanting absolute control over the mostly unregulated medical side or else they have made inferences they will then clamp down on the state.
Annie – is theocrat the word of the day from the White House? Can we expect Dredd to come busting in and use it, too?
SWM, there seems to be so many plain old conservatives that want to call themselves libertarians now and yes many of them are theocrats. I never understood how they could reconcile this with Ayn Rand, the queen mother of libertarianism.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/07/07/meet-sean-haugh-a-beer-drinking-gay-marriage-supporting-debt-hating-libertarian-who-wants-your-vote/ This guy is a non theocratic libertarian that is polling at 11 percent in NC. While he probably won’t win he might be a factor in this hotly contested senate race.
SWM – he can poll at anything, but when push comes to shove in the voting booth, those polling numbers will drop.
SWM,
Theocracy? You of course can support that being anything other than pure hyperbole. You are better than that.
gary, Well, maybe, but many that call themselves libertarian leaning republicans like the Pauls are also theocrats.
Swath:
Libertarian leaning, is not necessarily libertarian. I have further seen a lot of pundits and candidates simply calling themselve libertarians when 5 words out of their mouths proves conclusively they are not.
A theocrat, by definition could not be a libertarian.
There isn’t much conflict there, or real controversy.
Both parties will claim to be whatever brings in the voters. This is Sales 101. I believe we have a Coke v Pepsi contributor and those products are a great metaphor for the Republican v Democrat choice.
Citing the 14th Amendment and the “Citizens United” Supreme Court case:
If a “corporate person” is a marijuana corporation, wouldn’t they have the same rights as a Kentucky Bourbon corporation under the law?
Ross – I think the rights of the corporation would depend on the quality of the product.
“Do you know of a Conservative or Liberal officeholder? How about a Progressive officeholder? R and D are labels for electability and nothing more.” John Oliver Not really…. Progressive democrats are uniformly for certain things like gay marriage, progressive income tax rates, women’s reproductive healthcare, the repeal of Citizen’s United, etc. Most republicans hold the opposite view. Read the platforms, and look at the voting records.
SWM,
Do you know of a Conservative or Liberal officeholder? How about a Progressive officeholder? R and D are labels for electability and nothing more.
Gary T, i don’t even know of a libertarian office holder. Colorado and Washington have democratic governors and legislatures as do the states with legalized medical marijuana. The same thing is true with gay marriage but even more so. I live in a state with a progressive democratic governor and legislature. Gay marriage is legal and so is medical marijuana.
Swath:
Well, there a few, not many. But that is not the point.
The point is motivating ideology, and practical mercany political strategy.
Most of these gains have been wrought only by raw grassroots impetus; the politicians just saw the writing on the wall and went with the flow.
None of the in-power political parties or candidates would have even hinted at being pro marijuana or gay marriage 15 years ago.
But ALL libertarians, including the libertarian political candidates were strongly in favor of these things.
No one owns these thing politically, except libertarians.
Libertarians OWN this message, as well as Gay marriage.
The whiny snibbling progressives and Democrats are even too afraid to get behind these issues. That is fine for us, it give the libertarians the rightful accolades we deserve, as we have always been for these freedoms, even when they were not politically viable.
slohrss29
Yes, there is the economic end of the legalization dilemma. I bet there are people sweating the possibility of legalization on the boondocks end of the state where I live. I would think legalization budget ramifications would go all the way to the actual amount of law enforcement staff needed. You can see where that has huge and touchy political overtones.
————————————-
The biggest losers in legalizing pot are the police and prison system. All the funding for running those SWAT team busts at 4am with flash bangs will go by by. And there are a whole bunch of departments in places like Georgia that will need to find something for their officers to do other than park 6 deep on I-75 waiting for people from Florida to drive by.
On the other hand, maybe some of that additional funding can go for buglary interdiction, or rape investigation. If there was a profit motive for funding other than drug crimes maybe police would have task forces and shift funding for that.
SWM, I have said here many times Obama had the best election team since JFK. And, the worst administration in my lifetime. The latter is going to have Dems paying a price way past 2014. The notion that “smart” Dems can run a big govt. has taken a gut shot. Gut shots are very painful and almost always fatal. Dems will be running from Obama longer than they ran from Carter. And, it you look @ the macro picture, you will see this clearly.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/08/reading-the-2014-tea-leaves-110325.html?hp=t3_3#.U_yhO0jNBz9 “So where’s the wave? This is President Obama’s sixth-year-itch election. The map of states with contested Senate seats could hardly be better from the Republicans’ vantage point. And the breaks this year—strong candidates, avoidance of damaging gaffes, issues such as Obamacare and immigration that stir the party base—have mainly gone the GOP’s way, very unlike 2012.
Nonetheless, the midterms are far from over. In every single one of the Crystal Ball’s toss-up states, (Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana and North Carolina), the Republican Senate candidate has not yet opened up a real polling lead in any of them. Democratic nominees have been running hard and staying slightly ahead, or close to, their Republican foes.
Earlier this year, we published a “wave chart” giving the range of Senate election outcomes, from ripple to tsunami. Sometimes tidal waves, such as the 2006 Democratic swell that gave the party control of both houses of Congress, develop in late September or October. That’s certainly still a possibility for the GOP in 2014. However, the summer is waning, and as Labor Day approaches our estimate remains a Republican gain of four to eight seats, with the probability greatest for six or seven seats—just enough to put Republicans in charge of Congress’ upper chamber. The lowest GOP advance would fall two seats short of outright control; the largest would produce a 53-47 Republican Senate.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/08/reading-the-2014-tea-leaves-110325.html#ixzz3BVivG4BN
SWM, seeing Carl Rove’s face was priceless on election night, when he blew a gasket on Fox.
“The cultists never do. That’s why they’re cultists.” nick Actually you are wrong, the people you call cultists know the demographics and the polls. For instance, the people that ran the Obama campaign knew where their votes were. Hard to win in red states in off year elections. In 2016, there will be more republicans up. I predict Johnson in Wisconsin loses and the dems take back the senate should they lose it in 2014. My friends that are active can count which is something the republicans failed to do in 2012 and woke up shocked the next morning.
Dems are whores. Legalization means a loss of millions of govt. jobs.
Yes, there is the economic end of the legalization dilemma. I bet there are people sweating the possibility of legalization on the boondocks end of the state where I live. I would think legalization budget ramifications would go all the way to the actual amount of law enforcement staff needed. You can see where that has huge and touchy political overtones.