Will feds let new marijuana law stand without a fight?
»Play Video
SEATTLE (AP) - Washington joined Colorado in voting to become the first states to legalize and tax the sale of marijuana for recreational use, but people shouldn't expect to be able to buy a bag of legitimate weed any time soon.
Though Washington's Initiative 502 decriminalizes the possession of up to an ounce of marijuana beginning Dec. 6, the state has a year to come up with rules governing the growing, processing and labeling of pot before sales to adults over 21 can begin.
In addition, marijuana remains illegal under federal law, so the big question is whether the federal government will allow the measures in Washington and Colorado to take effect without a fight. The Justice Department is offering no enlightenment on that front.
"The Department of Justice's enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act remains unchanged," read identical statements issued by the U.S. attorney's offices in Denver and Seattle. "The department is reviewing the ballot initiative here and in other states and has no additional comment at this time."
State laws can be ruled invalid when they "frustrate the purpose" of federal law, and the DOJ could sue to try to block the measures from taking effect on those grounds.
"We have a lot of work ahead," said Alison Holcomb, campaign manager for the Washington initiative. "The biggest issue I-502 presents for the federal government is that we are creating a robust regulatory scheme."
Initiative 502 calls for a system of state-licensed growers, processors and retail stores where adults over 21 can buy up to an ounce of marijuana. It also establishes a standard blood test limit for driving under the influence.
Home-growing marijuana for recreational reasons remains barred, as does the public display or use of pot.
That didn't stop some supporters from celebrating Tuesday night with joints on a sidewalk outside the campaign party in downtown Seattle.
"I've been selling pot for 38 years," said supporter Ben Schroeter. "I've been busted multiple times, most recently eight days ago. Prohibition is stupid."
With 50 percent of precincts reporting, the Washington measure was passing with 55 percent of the vote. Colorado also approved recreational use, while a measure in Oregon was defeated.
State financial experts estimate Washington's initiative could raise nearly $2 billion in tax revenue over the next five years, with the money going toward education, health care, substance abuse prevention and basic government services.
Sponsors and supporters ranged from public health experts to two of the DOJ's top former officials in Seattle, U.S. Attorneys John McKay and Kate Pflaumer.
Legalization could reduce small-time, pot-related arrests and give supporters a chance to show whether decriminalization is a viable strategy in the war on drugs.
The effort raised more than $6 million in contributions, with more than $2 million of that coming from Progressive Insurance Co. founder Peter Lewis, who used marijuana to treat pain from a leg amputation.
Some people in the marijuana reform community also objected to the DUI standard, which they called arbitrarily strict.
The campaign had little organized opposition but raised objections by law enforcement officials and some substance abuse experts who said increasing access to pot was a bad idea.
"Legalizing is going to increase marijuana use among kids and really create a mess with the federal government," said Derek Franklin, president of the Washington Association for Substance Abuse and Violence Prevention. "It's a bit of a tragedy for the state."
For many voters, it came down to the notion that decades of marijuana prohibition have done more harm than good.
George Cannon, 43, of Seattle said it was an issue of personal freedom: "I'm not into getting into other people's business."
Initiative 502 found strong support among liberals and moderates, Democrats and those with more than a high school degree. Independents and women were split on the issue, as were suburbanites.
I-502 fared well in King County and the Puget Sound area, but not in Eastern Washington, Southwest Washington or on the Olympic Peninsula.
Opposition came from voters 65 and older, conservatives, Republicans and those with a high school degree or less. Weekly churchgoers rejected the measure, while those who said they never attend religious services or considered themselves occasional churchgoers favored legalizing pot.
The survey of Washington state voters was conducted for The Associated Press and television networks by Edison Research. It includes preliminary results from a survey of 1,493 voters who cast ballots early or submitted absentee ballots, and were interviewed by landline or cellular telephone from Oct. 29 through Nov. 4.
Results for the full sample were subject to sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. The figure was higher for subgroups.
Though Washington's Initiative 502 decriminalizes the possession of up to an ounce of marijuana beginning Dec. 6, the state has a year to come up with rules governing the growing, processing and labeling of pot before sales to adults over 21 can begin.
In addition, marijuana remains illegal under federal law, so the big question is whether the federal government will allow the measures in Washington and Colorado to take effect without a fight. The Justice Department is offering no enlightenment on that front.
"The Department of Justice's enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act remains unchanged," read identical statements issued by the U.S. attorney's offices in Denver and Seattle. "The department is reviewing the ballot initiative here and in other states and has no additional comment at this time."
State laws can be ruled invalid when they "frustrate the purpose" of federal law, and the DOJ could sue to try to block the measures from taking effect on those grounds.
"We have a lot of work ahead," said Alison Holcomb, campaign manager for the Washington initiative. "The biggest issue I-502 presents for the federal government is that we are creating a robust regulatory scheme."
Initiative 502 calls for a system of state-licensed growers, processors and retail stores where adults over 21 can buy up to an ounce of marijuana. It also establishes a standard blood test limit for driving under the influence.
Home-growing marijuana for recreational reasons remains barred, as does the public display or use of pot.
That didn't stop some supporters from celebrating Tuesday night with joints on a sidewalk outside the campaign party in downtown Seattle.
"I've been selling pot for 38 years," said supporter Ben Schroeter. "I've been busted multiple times, most recently eight days ago. Prohibition is stupid."
With 50 percent of precincts reporting, the Washington measure was passing with 55 percent of the vote. Colorado also approved recreational use, while a measure in Oregon was defeated.
State financial experts estimate Washington's initiative could raise nearly $2 billion in tax revenue over the next five years, with the money going toward education, health care, substance abuse prevention and basic government services.
Sponsors and supporters ranged from public health experts to two of the DOJ's top former officials in Seattle, U.S. Attorneys John McKay and Kate Pflaumer.
Legalization could reduce small-time, pot-related arrests and give supporters a chance to show whether decriminalization is a viable strategy in the war on drugs.
The effort raised more than $6 million in contributions, with more than $2 million of that coming from Progressive Insurance Co. founder Peter Lewis, who used marijuana to treat pain from a leg amputation.
Some people in the marijuana reform community also objected to the DUI standard, which they called arbitrarily strict.
The campaign had little organized opposition but raised objections by law enforcement officials and some substance abuse experts who said increasing access to pot was a bad idea.
"Legalizing is going to increase marijuana use among kids and really create a mess with the federal government," said Derek Franklin, president of the Washington Association for Substance Abuse and Violence Prevention. "It's a bit of a tragedy for the state."
For many voters, it came down to the notion that decades of marijuana prohibition have done more harm than good.
George Cannon, 43, of Seattle said it was an issue of personal freedom: "I'm not into getting into other people's business."
Initiative 502 found strong support among liberals and moderates, Democrats and those with more than a high school degree. Independents and women were split on the issue, as were suburbanites.
I-502 fared well in King County and the Puget Sound area, but not in Eastern Washington, Southwest Washington or on the Olympic Peninsula.
Opposition came from voters 65 and older, conservatives, Republicans and those with a high school degree or less. Weekly churchgoers rejected the measure, while those who said they never attend religious services or considered themselves occasional churchgoers favored legalizing pot.
The survey of Washington state voters was conducted for The Associated Press and television networks by Edison Research. It includes preliminary results from a survey of 1,493 voters who cast ballots early or submitted absentee ballots, and were interviewed by landline or cellular telephone from Oct. 29 through Nov. 4.
Results for the full sample were subject to sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. The figure was higher for subgroups.
Feds get out of our homes and lives and mind your own business. You have long overstepped your bounds and the tide is finally gturning against you. Bow out gracefully and change your laws that have only served to destroy your citizens who have bothered no one. Or have the balls to ban alcohol and cigarettes and stop taking $$$$ from the powerful lobbies that bribe you. You have no class, no honor, and no scruples. You are a disgrace and many of you probably have had your share of pot. You and the lawyers not only have access and use it, they sell it themselves. You are not special, you are to serve us not your damn pocket books and worship the almighty buck. Shame on any of you that keep up the sham and hypocricy of how bad pot is when you yourselves smoke it with impunityl You should all be arrested and jailed yourselves for you double standards.
Â
DDG, don't be a hypocrite, Get rid of the booze and cigarettes, genetic modified foods and the poisons and foods. Demand the FDA stop approving untested drugs, allow pollution in our water supply, hormones in meat, milk and countless other contaminents that are causing autism, and other damage to our children.  Then really educate yourself, interview users and look for the death statistics that are not existent versus the pigs that dirnk and drive than you come back with something sensible.
Â
I hope the Feds come in and take all the pot away.
@DDG Keep wishing, after HR 6606 it will be totally legal in any state that chooses so. Prohibition is fallnig under its own weight, propaganda succeeded for decades but finally the people is starting to realize they have been lied to.
Derek Franklin, president of the Washington Association for Substance Abuse and Violence Prevention needs to wake up and smell the coffee, the kids are already getting the stuff and smoking it, where the heck have you been. Since when do laws stop the kids from getting ANYTHING they want? Kids are able to drink before they are legal and always have been able to obtaid liquor someway, and the same with drugs, plus a lot of other things they shouldn't have access to, but they do! Making pot legal has nothing to do with the kids ability to smoke or obtain more or less. Reality check! Of course there has to be some stipulations just like there is with liquor. I have smoked pot and enjoyed it more than alcohol. But I certainly don't want my pilot drinking or smoking pot, or the bus driver or my doctor or lawyer! I also don't really want to be out on the highways and byways with any more goof balls than are already out there drinking or stone cold sober with a cell phone in there ear! Everything needs to be done in moderation and with some common sense. As far as the Feds, BUTT OUT!!!
The government spends between 80,000 to 120,000 per year to keep someone incarcerated, and 95% of the people in jail are non-violent drug users. The only "crime" that they committed was doing drugs and minding their own damn business. So in my honest opinion, the federal government needs to take a huge step back, stop locking up nonviolent people, allow people to choose and pursue what they think is right (As long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights of others) and to be able to make those choices.
Â
As to driving while high, I personally wouldn't drive high, and most people that i know wouldn't drive high either, because it makes you paranoid as heck. I'm damn scared to drive, even if i just smoked a little.
I just want to be able to use the roads with SOBER drivers. On another note...do you think Boeing should change the name of their Dream Liner to "Blue Dream Liner?"
This is a horrible law. It's ok as long as the state gets its grubby fingers in on the take. But if you want to grow it yourself and they don't get a cut, they'll still put you in jail. Not to mention they slipped in this DUI nonsense so thousands of people will be going to jail , having their insurance skyrocket and being forced to pay thousands in fines and treatment fees for having small amounts in their blood that have been there for god knows how long. Marijuana DOES NOT impair a driver anywhere near a dangerous level. Period ! This state looks more like an organized crime outfit every day.
You can't be more wrong on the DUI issue. It certainly DOES impair your ability to operate a vehicle.
 @Olypenparamedic Yes, it impairs you--but not nearly as much as alcohol. Also, a regular marijuana user is impaired much less than a casual smoker. MUCH less.
@kizzatta @Olypenparamedic OMG.. soooo you are saying if you smoke often enough you will be able to drive with just a slight impairment? I don't want to share the roads with even slightly impaired drivers. This state issued close to a thousand DUI's tickets in a 17 day period this last summer. 1,000 tickets in less than 3 weeks. We have a real problem with drunk drivers and I wonder if this has any relation to having easier access to hard liquor.Â
Â
Driving while under the influence of alcohol* the top should read.
You're statement is irrelevant. Driving while under the influence is also illegal. Plus with your logic, that would mean a raging alcoholic is less drunk than a casual drinker. Wrong- they're both getting a DUI. People who smoke weed just have so many excuses as to why they should be able to do whatever they want, and they ALWAYS start with comparing it to alcohol.
I don't like Reggae!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foJIe7PfDak&feature=g-vrec
So, what happened to the power of the people? Â That if the majority of Americans vote something to come to pass, then the government, who is suppose to be there to serve the citizenry, will obey and institute?
Â
If they overturn this voter approved new law and measure, then America is truly dead.
True, Obama can save more money by withdrawing several billion on State funding for Education, since Marijuana will make up the difference. That savings could go to Obamacare to to other States that abide by Federal law.
All the Feds have to do is pull highway funding and Washington will fall right back into line with Federal policy. I'm certain that the instant the Governor signs the bill into law, the US Attorney will file paperwork. The Federal government simply doesn't tolerate the individual states mucking about with it's drug policy.
Â
Don't get me wrong here. I make no statement for or against the issue. I'm just saying that the Feds have some pretty big hatchets to swing if it comes to a legal fight over this.
 @svensson They didn't do anything to stop it when it was proposed, voted on, or passed. I doubt they will do anything until they see how it works out.
 @svensson It would have to be put to another vote.
@Sovereign Not at all, Sovereign. No vote in necessary to withhold funding by the Federal government and the governor or legislature can and will set aside the results of I-502 if it does. The state simply can't afford to do without Federal highway funding and marijuana sales will not make up the billions needed.
We're not the first state to openly discuss legalizing marijuana. California did it 20 years ago. But the Federal government will not tolerate individual states interfering with drug policy. They didn't during Prohibition, for example.
You can bet that there's some pretty high level meetings on tap between the US Attorney and the state AG coming up.
Simple, don't do anything to be pulled over.
Â
I predict more people will start growing it at home, and selling it illegally if the retail price is to high though. And I definitely see a high price possibility. Also, twenty one?
 @sirgavin7 If more people grow it, then the price goes down. Supply and demand.Â
Â
And yes, 21. Weed intoxicates you, same as alcohol. Only weed isn't nearly as bad for your health. 21 is the age where the law technically considers you old enough to be able to make rational decisions such as not drinking and driving, or driving high in this case.
@sirgavin7 You could apply the same logic to alcohol, but people seem to have a hard time with that.
Â
And yeah, if mary-jane is legalized, I'd like to see it regulated and taxed in the exact same way that cirgarettes AND liquor are regulated and taxed.
How do you tax and regulate Canadians who come and dump hundreds and hundreds of pounds a year here. That money goes back to Canada, its never spent here. I talked with a young man who works in a medical dispensery telling me about Calif. outdoor growers bringing their product up here to sell in our dispenseries because they have flooded their own. That money goes back to Calif. The law says that dispenseries have to buy product local, but who is policing it? No one. I know that cigarettes are much cheaper to buy when purchased on the reservation. Why are they allowed to sell to the general public? There are so many problems with this States ability to generate revenue from consumer products these are just a few of them.
Â
Â
When does this law come into effect? I could not find the date anyway.
 @Grumpa The part about not being fined for carrying 1 gram or less on you goes into effect next month.  The commercialization stuff, by the end of 2013.
 @CommutingGuy  @Grumpa I thought it was 1 ounce???
In some state 3 DUI convictions is enough to be banned from owning a gun. There are many drug addicts out there who want to be cool and carry guns but they can't because of drug convictions. This is a ploy for convicted drug addicts to get their guns back and carry guns.
 @david davey I think you need to educate yourself a little more on the subject. This will probably decrease gun related incidences in relation to MJ. Regardless, the initiative will cover DUI for MJ use.......no different really from alcohol in it's own context. And just because some uses it on a recreational basis does not make them a drug addict, just as occasional alcohol use does not make one an alcoholic.... Â
 @Susabelle  @david davey WHOOSH
Do you really think that we can HASH this out here??
Â
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Â
Just Could NOT resist.......
Spine injuries,  even more people in wheelchairs and more shootings is what you will see now that pot smokers will be driving around while high on drugs smashing into other drivers and  carrying their guns while high on drugs.
Â
They want to be able to drive while high on drugs and be able to carry guns while high on drugs.
Â
Being high on drugs while carrying guns and driving vehicles is a recipe for more people being relegated to a life in a wheelchair.
 @david davey It's people like you that have no idea at all what you're talking about that create the drug problem. See the problem is that the market has been forced into the hands of criminals. Have you ever heard of alcohol prohibition ? Well it didn't work and drug prohibition isn't working any better. Millions in jail , thousands dead , yet pot has never killed anybody. It's idiots like you that are the problem. Die jerk.
 @david davey Would you like to join us in reality? There's lots of room.
 @david davey PLEASE...put your bong, AND your gun DOWN, and back SLOWLY away there Chicken Little...before you hurt someone.
 @WolfenÂ
Â
Are you a convicted felon who smokes dope and now wants to get your gun rights back so you can act all hard on the street? Or did you pop out a Jared Loughner progeny who was a dope smoker too?  Issac Zamora-- another schizoid dope smoker with a  washed up, dope smoker mother.Â
Â
You are never going to be allowed to smoke your dope and carry a gun at the same time. It is wishful thinking. This is going nowhere and every WA state governor knows it but will not tell these clowns to stop wasting their money on this issue.  More dopers driving means more people in wheelchairs with spinal injuries  from car accidents caused by  old, washed-up druggie weirdos driving on the roads or carrying guns.
Â
The issue of carry or owning guns and dope smoking must be addressed.
@david davey @Wolfen dude you are an idiot when you smoke pot you get more causious and you dont drive crazy like when you drink and drive if you think thats true than give me 3 incidents that only pot is involved that has seriously hurt some one.
 @Wolfen  @david davey You've officially labeled yourself as a crotchety old person. Satire. It's satire.
Yep. Wolfen is definitely crotchety, and OLD. Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha...
 @Wolfen  @david davey You're not kidding Wolfen..........but I think he is a little hyped up to be stoned.......I think he could actually use a bong hit and mellow out a bit....
 @david davey Did you even read the initiative? I'm trying to figure out how you're getting this linked. What exactly makes you think there will be more stoned drivers than there are now? What does this have to do with guns???Â
 @SusabelleÂ
Â
Dopers want to  carry guns and lots with drug convictions want to legalize pot so they can carry a gun legally. Smoking street drugs and carrying guns do not mix just ask all those people from the inner city neighborhoods whose corpses were hauled away after being shot duirng drug  transactions.Â
Â
The Arizona shooter of Gabby Giffords was a heavy pot smoker.
 @david davey by the way....the Feds put the kibosh on gun ownership after a drug conviction..........this doesnt touch fed gun laws....
 @david davey A little slow on the uptake aren't you? I want you to go back, slow down, and carefully think about where the guns come into play during a legal transaction..........no longer a dealer trying to protect his stash..... that's right........take your time........still not getting it? Well, cant say I didnt try...
Â
You really bought the opposition side of  refer madness didnt you and MJ being the plant of the devil, hehehehe, it's okay, maybe someday you will be able to connect the dots...
I believe it should not be a criminal offense to possess a reasonable amount. The rest of this... Well, I will wait for the state to figure out. Generally it would be handled based on jurisdiction. If our city, county and state police officers do not cite/arrest, the feds cannot do much.
Hate to tell you but the feds can get involved no matter if city/state/county does or doesnt cite you. They are federal meaning the are a step above city/state/county.
The Pot DUI bothers me. Are they going to bust folks on prescription meds that mess up their heads also..Ya know ..lets be fair..Are tired commuters going to be pulled over after 12 hour days just because their eyesn are red. This coulld turn into a witch hunt..
 @bluewillow57 Right. I'm on methadone and we've fought the cops for years over DWI issues. The fact you can pass all their sobriety field tests w/flying colors means nothing to the nazi pricks. It's not a public safety issue w/these creeps (as it should be). It's a way for them to still penalize you for something they don't  like you doing. Even though it's legal.
 @bluewillow57 Um, it's going to be exactly like drunk driving.  If you are driving so dangerously that they have to pull you over, then they'll give you a blood test and see if the THC level in your blood is over the limit.
 @CommutingGuy  @bluewillow57Â
Â
Some of the dope smokers are going to squeal like pigs if they have to give a blood test citing privacy concerns. Who is going to pay for all their blood tests when they drive while high on drugs?
Â
Where are the mad mothers? They will be silent until some cop or one of their progeny gets killed from a driving-while-high  person. It won't be long before they  get mad again.
Â
People can barely drive  in WA as it is..
 @bluewillow57Â
Â
So you want pot smokers to be able to drive while high on dope and be able to carry guns while high on dope? If some doper smashes you up with their car I suspect you will be the first one to call yourself a victim.
 @david davey
@david davey it will be illegal to drive while high, just as it is to be intoxicated  @bluewillow57Â
@david davey @bluewillow57 Not that its a good idea to drive stoned, the fact is that is is far more dangerous to drive while drunk on alcohol than it is to drive stoned on pot.
 @rodbindgerÂ
Â
Â
Are you so stupid as to not know these weirdos killing their own kind in the central district do it over drugs? Why would you want them to legally carry guns?
Â
The issue of gun rights has to be brought up every time the issue of dope smoking is brought up. You cannot separate the two.
Â
Guns and dope smoking do not mix anymore than alcohol and cars do.
@ David Give me factully based number of how many people high on marijuana have " smashed up your car " and how many DUI arrest are made solely on the driver being impaired by marijuana? If you actually did research before you responded you would find the number of DUI arrest for marijuana are quite small.