Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday called on the federal government to move “as quickly as possible” to change the way it officially classifies marijuana, saying that “nobody should have to go to jail for smoking weed.”

“I cannot emphasize enough that they need to get to it as quickly as possible,” Harris said. “We need to have a resolution based on their findings and their assessment. This issue is stark when one considers the fact that on the schedule currently, marijuana is considered as dangerous as heroin ― as dangerous as heroin ― and more dangerous than fentanyl, which is absurd, not to mention patently unfair.”

Marijuana is currently listed as a Schedule 1 drug by the Drug Enforcement Administration. That classification designates it one of the most dangerous drugs possible, with no medicinal uses. Other substances in the same category include heroin, ecstasy and LSD. Marijuana advocates have been pushing for years for the federal government to either reschedule marijuana to a different category or deschedule it entirely.

  • Got_Bent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    168
    ·
    9 months ago

    Harris oversaw more than 1,900 marijuana convictions in San Francisco, previously unreported records from the DA’s office show. Her prosecutors appear to have convicted people on marijuana charges at a higher rate than under her predecessor, based on data about marijuana arrests in the city.

    As the political winds blow with her I guess. At least it’s a positive change.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      123
      ·
      9 months ago

      Eh.

      That was when it went from jail to a fine though.

      So lots of people stopped giving a shit and started smoking publicly.

      And she’s been pro legalization for years now.

      There’s lots of shit to criticize Biden and Harris on, but Harris’s time as a DA and her cannabis conviction just isn’t a good one.

      • ArcRay@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        8 months ago

        “Under Harris, the D.A.'s office obtained more than 1,900 convictions for marijuana offenses, including persons simultaneously convicted of marijuana offenses and more serious crimes.[73] The rate at which Harris’s office prosecuted marijuana crimes was higher than the rate under Hallinan, but the number of defendants sentenced to state prison for such offenses was substantially lower.[73] Prosecutions for low-level marijuana offenses were rare under Harris, and go her office had a policy of not pursuing jail time for marijuana possession offenses.”

        From her Wikipedia page (the reference is pay walled and im not invested enough to figure it out).

      • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        If they’re going with the crowd, that’s societal inertia or peer pressure, not change. Harris is not making a big controversial stand, a majority of Americans want legalization - across demographics, political leanings, and income.

        Now if she was advocating heroin prescriptions as a harm reduction, or expunging her own convictions for possession, or a systemic reevaluation of our drug law and enforcement approach? THAT’S a change that shows she understands how the law is bad, not this new political posturing to win votes callously

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          8 months ago

          That’s honestly better I think. If she doesn’t personally believe it, but is expressing support for it politically, that means the topic is winning.

    • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      9 months ago

      Or this is what she wants the law to be, that was what she did when her job was to enforce the law that existed back then.

      • Catoblepas
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        9 months ago

        DAs always have discretion in what cases to drop or move forward, along with being able to offer plea bargains. They aren’t legally required to prosecute everyone who smokes weed, it’s just good optics to a certain political class to do so. And that political class was a much bigger tent even 10-15 years ago.

    • danc4498@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      8 months ago

      Also, they talk about marijuana every time there’s an election, then don’t actually change it.

  • rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    91
    ·
    9 months ago

    “Somebody ought to do something about this ASAP,” says one of the only people on the planet actually capable of doing something about it for the last 4 years. OK.

    • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Elections are coming up so it’s time to talk about it and do nothing else that would make it happen

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      9 months ago

      Biden could order cannabis descheduled ( what his campaign program was) and if agencies don’t listen, fucking fire the agency heads and hire someone that will. It literally one of the handful of things he could do himself.

      But somehow it’s 3.5 years into his first term. And Biden has apparently compromised even more with himself and we won’t get his original compromise of descheduling.

      When a president acts like this right before their next election, lots of voters rationally stop believing any of their current campaign promises.

      • zigmus64@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        9 months ago

        What do you mean? This is standard political fare… most of the population has the memory of a goldfish, so popular shit like this always waits until the election cycle.

        Additionally, an executive order, or changing the chief of the DEA, are probably the least effective ways to handle it. All it would take is a republican administration to undo it all. The way that sticks best is legislation.

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          9 months ago

          Your boat is leaking.

          Do you either bail out the water, or try to get into port so you can fix it.

          Or maybe, you do both. Biden can reschedule…. Today. He could have done it 3.5 years ago.

          He hasn’t. He probably won’t.

          You’re right that legislation is a more permanent fix. No question there. Doesn’t mean you don’t work the other, faster, solution to get something good enough for the time being done.

          • zigmus64@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            I’m not convinced they’d even try passing the legislation once some executive order was issued. It would be touted as a victory for the Biden Administration, and then forgotten about until 2028…

            God damnit, when did I become so cynical?

              • june@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                Following tue legal framework to get this done is slow footing it? Are you aware it’s in the final stage before getting rescheduled?

                • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Claiming that slow walking it is following some fictional legal framework is just an excuse for slow walking it.

                  I’m not buying any bullshit about it being the final anything.

                  If you want me to treat it as anything more than a filthy lie, democrats should have been taking their campaign promises more seriously.

                  Let me guess. We’re in the final stage of passing the public option, the minimum wage increase, codifying roe, and closing gitmo as well. I’m sure we’re in the final stage of passing BBB and reforming our out of control police too.

                  After decades of lies, you expect me to buy that Democrats are telling the truth about wanting to do the right thing?

                  What unmitigated hogwash.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          most of the population has the memory of a goldfish, so popular shit like this always waits until the election cycle.

          Stupid uninformed people…

          Most of them vote R or not at all.

          But neoliberals refuse to acknowledge people who aren’t ignorant and do care.

          “Because what are ya gonna do, vote Republican?”

          It doesn’t work.

          Maybe we try helping people? Worst case scenario, Dems actually help people when they’re in office.

          Isn’t that the whole point of electing Dems? Isn’t that better than just stalling the Republicans destruction of our country?

          • zigmus64@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            9 months ago

            I completely agree… but that’s how this shit goes. This is definitely one of the situations where both sides pull the same shenanigans. When was the last time you heard Kamala Harris open her mouth? Granted, she’s been busy in a divided Senate, but Dan Quayle was more visibly present during the elder Bush’s administration than Kamala has been during Biden’s. Now she crawls out of the Senate chambers to talk about cannabis? Better late than never I guess.

            It’s not like Biden’s administration hasn’t been doing anything useful. But these wildly popular policy initiatives that would do a lot of good often wait for politically convenient moments when it’ll be fresh in the electorate’s memory.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              9 months ago

              Which is the exact danger of running neoliberals that only care about being elected.

              The only thing making this “how shit goes” is both parties get money from the same donors who don’t want anything fixed.

              It’s not like how the sun sets everyday and there’s nothing we can do.

              So telling people “that’s the way she goes” isn’t helping and is only hurting turnout.

              • zigmus64@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                9 months ago

                Ok… so how do we run people genuinely interested in fixing it? How do we make this not how shit goes? I can’t argue that it’s really disheartening, but the idea that any party is going to run anyone primarily interested in anything other than getting reelected is absurd. The National Committees for each party would never give them a platform. Running third party is suicide here.

                The real change that needs to happen is election reform to provide more transparent campaign financing and moving away from a First Past the Post voting system. That’s how you get people in who can actually fix the issues we have in a constructive and positive manner. It won’t be perfect but it would be helpful. Then we’d have a flourishing of different political parties emerge and voters would have actual choice.

                “That’s the way she goes” shouldn’t hurt turnout. The reality is we’re facing the single greatest threat to the basic ideals of the American Republican Democracy. Bigger things are afoot than cannabis policy. I’ll take this political grandstanding from the Biden administration 10 times out of 10 than one more day of a Trump administration.

                • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  All of those are good ideas to fix it, but we can’t make those changes with the system as broken as it is.

                  I think the biggest thing to help turnout would be acknowledging that nothing is going to get done, and that we want a government that just makes nice noises since we clearly can’t get one that actually works. Like you said: You’d take this sort of grandstanding over Trump any day.

                  It’s like a mechanic putting in some Sea Foam cleaner to get rid of the knock over doing a full engine rebuild, which we can’t afford. Yeah, it’s gonna break down eventually but at least you don’t have to deal with the noise. It’ll break down eventually, but for now you can at least hear NPR.

                • Pandantic [they/them]@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  The real change that needs to happen is election reform

                  Ranked choice voting! Then, aside from the stupid money and power the two party system has, you can make your voice heard. You can actually say “I don’t want Biden, but I’ll take him if my candidate doesn’t win.” That will make the neo-libs move the needle. Like everything else, though, it will probably happen state-by-state.

                • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  Ok… so how do we run people genuinely interested in fixing it? How do we make this not how shit goes?

                  Undo citizens united would be a great first step…

                  Something that the majority of Dem voters agree with.

                  Without those donations and the obligations they come with, neoliberals would stop winning primary elections, and the ones still in office would stop having a reason to oppose progress.

                  I didn’t read anything else you typed after that, because if you didn’t understand that already, I don’t see how anything else you could have said was in any way relevant

          • june@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            9 months ago

            I guess pardoning all federal possession and use convictions isn’t helping people eh?

      • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        9 months ago

        He attempted to forgive student debt (which was in his right to do so as head of the executive branch) and got swatted down by the corrupt Supreme Court. What do you think will happen if he rescheduled marijuana?

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          9 months ago

          He waited 2 years till he lost the house, made a half assed attempt he knew would fail, then said:

          See? Trying is just a waste of time, we should never try

          And voters remember that when it’s two years later and he tries to tell them elections are important and if Trump wins suddenly the president is all powerful.

          Neoliberals do the same shit as republicans. They need their voters to believe that when the other team is president, the president is all powerful. But when their own team is in power, the president can’t do shit, so it’s not their fault campaign promises aren’t kept.

        • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          The student loan forgiveness was swatted down because he technically didn’t really have the authority to do so, Congress typically holds the power of the purse. Rescheduling isn’t at risk of violating the separation of power as the DEA is under the purview of the executive.

          • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            9 months ago

            The Higher Education Act of 1965 grants a presidential administration via the Education Secretary, authority to “enforce, pay, compromise, waive, or release” government-held federal student loans.

            At least until the Corrupt Supreme Court said differently.

      • june@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Source for where Biden called for it to be descheduled?

        I can’t find it.

      • rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yeah I agree, they’d be better not even bringing it up instead of walking around campaigning on something they should have done years ago.

      • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        I think this was always back-pocketed for right before the election if he thought it’d help push him over the edge.

        It might be a smart political move to do it right before the election so it’s fresh on all of our goldfish brains.

    • crusa187@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s honestly just insulting at this point. Deschedule the fucking plant already, you doddering old fools.

      When you’re done, we can have a frank conversation about the number of people directly killed by alcohol each year. (It’s literally infinitely more compared to marijuana.)

    • njm1314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      Man I think you have way too high of expectations for the actual powers of a vice presidency.

  • Omgboom@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    83
    ·
    8 months ago

    “nobody should have to go to jail for smoking weed”

    -The person who made a career putting people in jail for smoking weed

    • Mike@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      8 months ago

      Harris has been pro weed for years now. One of the foremost issues with our political system in the US is that these people are elected by a constituency that demands a job be done in a way that they want. (I am purposely ignoring the corporate donor aspect for this statement)

      The locality (and the era) demanded drug dealers go to jail, so she did her job. Where Harris has floundered is how she talks about it and attonrs for it today.

      You can be outspoken about a politicians past, but it’s disingenuous to ignore that a politician has changed, especially so if they have changed with positive progression.

        • njm1314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          8 months ago

          I wouldn’t call being angry at a prosecutor putting innocent people into prison blind hate exactly. Certainly I wouldn’t accept the logic that the constituency wanted to put innocent people in prison and that’s why she did it, even if I believe that I would still find that morally repugnant.

          • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            8 months ago

            I more mean that there are a lot of new accounts coming in and plastering this hate all over the place, and their reasoning is always “once a hater always a hater.” They aren’t here genuinely, or they are extremely ignorant of how humans work.

            • njm1314@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              I’m sorry I don’t take your meaning. In response to a comment about people disliking Kamala Harris for her record as a prosecutor, especially when she knowingly withheld evidence and secured the imprisonment of innocent suspects, you just decided to talk about how hate is bad in general? Seems odd. Don’t know why you make the comment in that exact spot if it is nothing to do at all with the topic. Kind of confusing.

              • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                8 months ago

                I’m saying that the intentional burying of head when it comes to her slow shift to supporting it being rescheduled, is hating for the sake of hate.

                She did her job, and yeah her view was shit at the time. But she did what we all say we want people to do, and changed her tune. But somehow we still hate her?

                You can hate past actions, but she either saw the light, or saw that her views were shit and is acting against her own views in support of the will of the people. A “yeah but” thrown on top is just trying to divide.

                • njm1314@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I’m sorry what? Where are you getting that she’s changed her tune? She isn’t up there talking about judicial reform or changing the way prosecutors work.

            • Mike@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              I know there’s been a big too-do about lemmy and it’s modding tools (or lack there of) but I worry that this is a major concern for the platforms long term viability. With reddit, we could restrict posting from accounts with less than whatever karma, I don’t know if that exists with lemmy communities.

      • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Except being a politician is also about image as much as we may not want it to be. Biden being the champion of student loan forgiveness while also being the champion of making student loan debt almost impossible to discharge earlier in his career doesn’t really feel all that great ya know? Same shit with Harris.

  • Flax@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    8 months ago

    I unironically think that if marijuana should be banned, then so should alcohol

    • can@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      ·
      8 months ago

      If they were both first introduced today alcohol would definitely be the one people would want more restricted.

      • nomous@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        8 months ago

        Alcohol can kill you pretty quickly if you’re not careful, IMO it probably should be more restricted than weed.

        • Welt@lazysoci.al
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          It’s too easy to make, and weed is too easy to grow, so neither should be restricted since they’re part of our culture and will be consumed anyway. Broadly true for other drugs as well since they can be got, but it’s not like just anyone can make MDMA (which, if taken in a pure and controlled dose, is safer than both cannabis and alcohol incidentally, with therapeutic benefits too).

      • Zozano@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        8 months ago

        Absolutely not true.

        As soon as republicans discover it’s easier to convince underaged girls to fuck them if they’re drunk, it’s going legal.

    • Nyoka@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      Maybe try reading about the 1920s attempt and get back to us on if you still feel that way.

      • Flax@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        8 months ago

        The difference is I don’t think either should be banned, really. But mainly because the bans just don’t work.

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    9 months ago

    For the, “why are you doing it now, convenient!” crowd - first of all yes, that’s how politics works. Trump is a constant heartbeat of bullshit and you need to have strategically timed news and events to stay in people’s short term memories for voting impact - especially the committed stoners :)

    But also, Biden admin has been working towards this for years. He is not the most progressive anything, but he’s doing more than his predecessors on either side (and the pathetic gop alternative) and that’s progress.

    You don’t make major legislative change by firing a cannon at the front door - you set several small fires at all the other exits on the building and then when all that is in motion, you just knock on the front door to warn everyone about the fire and they walk out willingly.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/10/06/statement-from-president-biden-on-marijuana-reform/

    https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/06/politics/marijuana-decriminalization-white-house-joe-biden/index.html

    https://www.npr.org/2023/12/22/1221230390/biden-pardons-clemency-marijuana-drug-offenses

    On December 2, 2022, Biden signed the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act - “the first standalone marijuana-related bill approved by both chambers of the United States Congress”

    Biden approved the Viktor Bout–Brittney Griner prisoner exchange work Russia on December 8, 2022 which involved an American WNBA athlete being convicted of cannabis possession on Russian soil and being held in Russian prison.

    • Dkarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      9 months ago

      None of this matters. This could all be over tomorrow if Biden gave orders to the dea. Pretending this even has anything to do with Congress or the courts is a joke.

      This is purely a scheduling issue.

          • nomous@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            8 months ago

            It’s like you guys don’t understand how governing actually works.

            You just want your guy to get in there and do the things you want him do with zero understanding of the realpolitik involved.

              • nomous@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                8 months ago

                I wouldn’t really call Biden “My guy” or say he’s doing everything I want done but I understand incrementalism.

                It took the rightwing 70 years of concerted effort to hijack the judiciary and local offices and get to where they are today. I don’t expect the left will be able to undo it in any less.

                • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  but I understand incrementalism.

                  So do I. It’s a transparent attempt on the part of Democrats to turn decades of inaction into a virtue.

                  It took Biden no time to sell weapons to Netanyahu. He didn’t need decades of doing fucking nothing first. He just did it.

      • Snapz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        This is a childish view… You can TECHNICALLY do a lot of shit with a snap of your fingers, but there are major consequences if you don’t prepare for major shifts in the status quo gradually.

        For example, say a child’s parent dies in a car crash, you can take them away from the hospital to get some ice cream, have their grandparents there, and say together, “So mommy isn’t going to be coming home now, Billy. She was very sick and the doctors tried to help her get better but she died today. She loved you very much and I still love you and your grandpa and grandma are here and they love you and we’re going to adjust together and remember mommy as a family” or the doctor can just come out of the operating room covered in mommy’s blood and say to the kid, “your mom had her head chopped off by a train, kid. You need to get out of the hospital now. This isn’t my problem”

        Both are technically the same action of informing the kid of some significant news/change.

  • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    You know, this is a pretty smart way to approach the political side of this tactically.

    Biden can’t say deschedule it outright without offending at least some borderline fence sitters and the elder crowd indoctrinated with the old propaganda that made it out to be among the most terrible things.

    By having the younger VP who wouldn’t really have direct authority to have it changed but is directly I’m the same circles, it gets the idea out there as a ‘very strong unofficial stance’.

    Next step, the ‘cool grandpa’ moment when Biden gets to make a gesture for the younger crowd by having it pulled from the schedules. Financially the feds have undoubtedly been eyeing the income (and lack of incarceration costs) brought into states with legal sales for a while and would like a piece of it too.

    • Troooop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Biden already ordered his health secretary back in 2022 to begin descheduling, he hasn’t been playing it safe here

    • Spiralvortexisalie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      So lies and deception? I don’t know who is left to deceive when this sounds like the position the WH had two decades ago (when Biden was in Harris’s exact role). Since then the only changes have been brought about by State’s thumbing their nose at the Federal Government. I can honestly say the argument for “State’s Rights” hold more promise for marijuana legalization than Harris’s words.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Neoliberals dont want elected to help people, they want to get elected.

        It’s why they can see something like this where a president could do something day 1, but waits four years before doing it, and call it smart strategy. Even when it’s not a political.process and the president can do it on their own.

        It’s why there’s always the focus on “stopping by the republican”.

        That’s all neoliberals want to accomplish, get in office and hold on as long as they can.

        Progressives want to get elected to help people, and have faith if you help people they’ll vote for you.

        There’s no sane reason for neoliberals to be running the Dem.party on national and state levels, but it’s a private party and they get an absolute shit ton of money from billionaires and corporations. So it’s very hard to kick their old asses out of power while also fighting off conservative extremist Republicans.

        But when the neoliberals wins, nothing gets fixed. Their dogs chasing a car, if they catch it they dont know what to do, so they lay down and wait for another car to drive by.

        • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          9 months ago

          Progressive idealism is all well and good, but without acknowledging the realities of a highly polarized world and the balances of power in play all it will ever be is idealism, never realized fact.

          Many of the broader growths in society didn’t have a defining ‘flip the switch’ moment and instead where the result of small changes that then where the building blocks to bigger ones after the smaller steps where accepted as normal parts of society.

        • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          “They wait 4 years to accomplish their policy proposals, this is evidence they never accomplish any policy proposals”

          • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            9 months ago

            They wait 4 years to accomplish their policy proposals

            Don’t act like they’ve accomplished them.

            • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              9 months ago

              You have to realize that there’s a certain element of theatrics to politics right? With the flood of information thrown at people everyday the population has the attention span and memory of goldfish often as not. Had they done some drastic change day one (if it could even pass congress/courts without being killed) it’d be long forgotten old news by now.

              • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                Yes, it’s much better to drag it out until the very last possible second, since it’s not like people are suffering due to the deliberate prolongation of the racist drug war.

                It’s still disrupting the communities it was designed to disrupt, so let’s talk about how great it is that we’re trying to game the timing of fixing this. I’d ask if it’s possible to be more cynical, but I already know it is because we’re playing the same timing game with Netanyahu’s genocide.

                Yes, it’s theatrical. And people are being used as props.

                • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Didn’t say it was good, but it’s reality. The alternative of attempting to do everything you have on a wishlist with no compromise or negotiation, and thus getting nothing is hardly better. Had it been tried to push everything to max results day one would at best, in some imagined place get all that in, be forgotten 3 years later as ‘what have you done for me lately’ and caused the opposition to be energized en masse to put their guy in and rip it all back out the next day.

                  A small win that’s held is worth far more than a massive one lost shortly after.

              • Landsharkgun@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                EDIT: Thought better of that one.

                But seriously, stuff treating millions of people’s lives like a fucking game. You disgust me.

        • idiomaddict@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          The problem is that this is potentially the only positive change they could make in people’s lives that might actually make money, so once they’ve done it, there’s nothing else that lines up with both the interests of the party and their voters. Even prison reform as a whole might be a net loss in spite of the current system’s incredible cost to taxpayers due to the chilling effect it has on social mobility and the slave labor that the bourgeoisie can profit off of.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            9 months ago

            We can’t do the only easy thing we can do because then we won’t have any easy things we can promise to do that we just won’t!!!

            • idiomaddict@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              Exactly. Why would they actually move on it, if it’s the only bargaining chip they’re willing to use? The republicans fucked up by doing that with abortion, though because that oppresses people instead of liberating them, the gop is doubling down on it. Dems don’t have the option to do that, so we’re left with easily actionable campaign promises going unfulfilled for four years.

  • capital@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I grew up straight edge in a religious household. I was so afraid of getting into trouble, I didn’t even drink as a teenager even though all my friends did.

    Now my work depends on me keeping away from illegal drugs. Seeing as my family’s livelihood depends on that, it’s a pretty straightforward decision to never cross that line, ever. So I say this as a 30+ yr old who’s rarely drank and never done drugs of any kind that weren’t prescribed.

    If this changes, and it’s confirmed that my livelihood wouldn’t be threatened for trying it, I would absolutely partake.

    • vmaziman@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      As with all things go slow till u know ur limits greenouts aren’t too bad but they happen and better off nodding off in your house that at like work. Also anxiety and paranoia can happen with stronger strains or strong edibles so take it slow

      • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’d never suggest getting high at work. You’re just asking for trouble, even if it’s not legally a problem. I’d also never suggest drinking at work, to put that into context.

        And god forbid you get in an accident while drunk/high, your job will definitely be over, and you’ll more than likely be footing the bill on your own.

  • LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    8 months ago

    Just so everyone knows, the DEA is actively reviewing a report from the Department of Health and Human services where they recommended to reschedule weed to a schedule 3. Biden had directed HHS to research to see if it should be rescheduled, so while biden hasn’t unilaterally legalized weed (something that would quickly be challenged in court since presidents don’t usually have unilateral power for most things), he has definitely been pushing it not be schedule 1. Which, while not legalization, would be a huge step for not just the industry but for all the medical patients out there who have had their doctors refuse to treat them because they use weed for pain.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      8 months ago

      So instead of descheduling it, he’s looking into maybe one day thinking about starting the process of still keeping it illegal, but not as illegal.

      • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        8 months ago

        Biden cannot de-schedule it. At most, he could issue an executive order telling the DEA to stop pursuing marijuana charges. Even if he did, the next president could just undo that. Biden is doing what he can which is calling for the AG to reschedule the drug.

        There are only two ways weed can be de/rescheduled. First, is for congress to pass legislation doing so which then would need to be signed by the president. Congress is not going to do that. It’s been attempted multiple times and has never come anywhere near passing. They pretty much all died in committee.

        The second way is the way mandated by by the Controlled Substances Act. That laws states that, first, someone must file a petition with the attorney general, or the AG could initiate the process themselves. The AG then sends the request to HHS Secretary to start a scientific and medical evaluation of the request. HHS and FDA then conduct an assessment and sends a recommendation to the AG. Meanwhile, the AG/DEA conduct their own review of the request. Assuming everyone agrees, the AG then initiates the standard rule making process following the Administrative Procedures Act and the White House, after it’s own review and the change can be made.

        This article has a lovely, if disheartening flowchart of the process. It is a convoluted bureaucracy, but there is hope since the process was started in 2022 when President Biden instructed HHS to conduct a review into rescheduling marijuana.

        HHS has since completed their review and sent a formal recommendation to the Attorney General on August 29 of 2023 recommending that marijuana be moved from Schedule I to Schedule III. The ball is currently in the DEA’s court. They have to conduct their own review and rumor has it that there are those within the DEA who disagree with Biden’s push to reschedule weed. Still, with at least half the states allowing some form of legal access to marijuana, and the FDA having approved at least one drug derived from marijuana, they will be hard pressed to find some compelling reason to go against the HHS recommendation.

        Of course, I think it’s only too clear that the DEA is likely to strongly oppose this change and there are rumors that this is the case. Now it’s just a matter of the DEA dragging it’s feet before making an official announcement.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          8 months ago

          Biden cannot de-schedule it.

          Odd. Chuck Schumer seems to think he can.

          At most, he could issue an executive order telling the DEA to stop pursuing marijuana charges.

          Then if he doesn’t hate the minority communities that the racist drug war was designed to disrupt, he should have done this on day 1.

          Even if he did, the next president could just undo that.

          We should never do anything because Republicans might undo it.

          There are only two ways weed can be de/rescheduled. First, is for congress to pass legislation doing so which then would need to be signed by the president. Congress is not going to do that. It’s been attempted multiple times and has never come anywhere near passing. They pretty much all died in committee.

          The second way is the way mandated by by the Controlled Substances Act. That laws states that, first, someone must file a petition with the attorney general, or the AG could initiate the process themselves. The AG then sends the request to HHS Secretary to start a scientific and medical evaluation of the request. HHS and FDA then conduct an assessment and sends a recommendation to the AG. Meanwhile, the AG/DEA conduct their own review of the request. Assuming everyone agrees, the AG then initiates the standard rule making process following the Administrative Procedures Act and the White House, after it’s own review and the change can be made.

          That process sounds like complete bullshit from top to bottom when compared with the process needed to sell weapons for the genocide all centrists love.

          • nomous@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            8 months ago

            Why would I like him slow walking descheduling? You don’t even make sense, you’re just saying things to score imaginary points in your head.

      • LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        8 months ago

        Nope, the process to reschedule has been started, it’d be changed to schedule 3, which, unless you think tylenol with codeine is illegal, it wouldn’t be illegal anymore.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          Nope, the process to reschedule has been started,

          Which is just another way of saying “we’re looking into it.”

          • LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            8 months ago

            I mean technically yeah, but that’s just updating the citizens that the process is actively rolling. I’d rather be updated that things are happening as opposed to radio silence and thinking the administration is ignoring the issue.

            • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              They’re pretending that something is happening when it won’t. Some stupid bureaucratic hurdle will come up that they could circumvent if they wanted, but they’ll gleefully announce that their hands are tied.

              And people like you will buy it immediately. I’m sick of the endless lies and bullshit. I’m sick of being ordered to be happy because we’re totally working on something until we get in our own way and stop it again.

              • nomous@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Care to wager on that?

                I never thought it’d be legal in my deep red midwestern state but I can go to the weed shop and buy it OTC now, they’re packed every time I go. Not sure why you think a sitting president (who’s shown signs he wants to listen the fringes of his party) wouldn’t push for rescheduling, it’s an easy win frankly. I’m pretty cynical and even I’m not that cynical.

                • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Care to wager on that?

                  I mean, you’ll count his next “we’re looking into it” as full recreational legalization nationwide, so no.

    • fidodo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      A very important part of this is it allows for federal studies into the benefits of marijuana which is not allowed under schedule 1 status.

  • yarr@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    8 months ago

    zzzz Wake me up when they actually do something

    This is so cheap. They want the credit for fixing something without the effort of getting it done

    • cogman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      If it happens, it will almost certainly be around oct. No use blowing such a popular move in the middle of an election year.

      • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        8 months ago

        Donald Trump came into office and had both Houses.

        Never even mentioned weed, unless it was to talk about how users should be executed.

        But I’m sure he’ll change next time

              • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                8 months ago

                What makes you think there’s a giant majority of the country begging for a hard Left party?

                Every poll I’ve seen puts ‘Socialists’ at about 6% of the population.

                Do you have better data?

                • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  What makes you think there’s a giant majority of the country begging for a hard Left party?

                  Well, about this particular issue, 70% of the US wants what neither conservative party is willing to ever do.

                • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Poll on the issues and policies instead of the labels and you’ll get wildly different results

      • thirteene@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Or they felt confident that they would get a free win, and delayed it until the election news cycle. It’s likely a bit of both.

      • Death_Equity@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        8 months ago

        Not in all cases. There are different types of legalization.

        Rescheduling is probably the better way forward because it would allow for medical use within the healthcare system.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        No, the relevant agencies (I think FDA?) control how drugs are scheduled, so essentially it’s just a case of that agency making the change. I don’t even think the President needs to be involved in that.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        If it comes down to pretending it does versus letting up on the racist drug war, Democrats will need congress.

        It’s not like it’s something they want to do, like supporting the genocide every last centrist has always wanted. Don’t need congress for that.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    8 months ago

    I barely touched weed my whole life until I got medical access ~5 years ago. I was also never a big drinker or user of other recreational substances.

    The stuff helps me so much that I use my vape or edibles almost every single day. That plus the margin of safety makes it downright cruel in my eyes that it’s prohibited in so many places.

    But I guess given the racist motives of the anti-marijuana push 40 years ago, maybe the cruelty was the point.

  • LadyAutumn
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’m glad they want to change that. I hope they do. Far too many people, especially minorities, serving sentences for weed. It does feel like a bit of a hollow victory when women’s rights are being rolled back to the 19th century, though.

  • mellowheat@suppo.fi
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Kamala Harris promised to reschedule it right the following day after Biden has won the presidential elections. She added, “and if you don’t like the idea of marijuana being rescheduled”, and loudly winked three times.

  • abracaDavid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    8 months ago

    “oh shit! They’re onto us about the TikTok thing! Quick! Bring up weed! The zoomers and millennials love that shit!”

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Too late. I am never voting for my rep again, I won’t vote GOP but I won’t vote for someone who thinks Tik Tok is the priority

    • mikezane@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      9 months ago

      Let’s hope more politicians don’t do things that the majority of the people want in order to be reelected, what a terrible world that would be.

      • Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        My point is they haven’t done it already because their doners want people in their prisons. It is the same reason it will never pass and they know it. She is just saying words. That’s it. Pandering to people dumb enough to believe them. Just like their spill about taxing the rich and student loan relief. It goes directly against the interest of the people that got them where they are. The half ass attempts are to make us think they tried and the big bad Republicans stopped it. It’s all theater.