There is something called the “first mover advantage” that Colorado greatly benefited from. Illinois could have an advantage on a smaller scale in the midwest. Somehow though, it feels like it’s slipping away.
Chop chop people. Sometimes money does grow, if not on trees, well then on leafy plants.
I know some people think it untoward to talk about legalization as a revenue generator, but it will be, and legalization is inevitable, so just do it and make as much money from it as possible. It won’t be a draw if the surrounding states beat us to the punch.
Voted too fast. For the record I’m pretty ambivalent about legalization at all, I think using pot is a very bad life choice that does impact society (in admittedly smaller ways than most other illegal activities), but at the same time going to jail for years seems extreme to me. That being said, the demand that it happen right now because we need the money just seems wrong headed to me. And the rhetoric saying that is is harmless, or a miracle cure for all that ails you, also puts me on edge and makes me think we need to spend the time to cut through the rhetoric on both sides.
Think the pace is about right. With the size of the state as well as how we tend not to think ‘revenue opportunities’ through (see video poker) taking a bit of time isn’t a bad idea.
- Former Downstater - Friday, Mar 22, 19 @ 3:15 pm:
Considering we don’t yet have an introduced bill, I don’t see how it could be happening too fast. Let’s continue moving forward deliberately, with public hearings, testimony, more public forums, and work up to a vote.
About rights is the closest answer that comes to me with the information I have on what is happening. IMHO, there has been enough experience to support a policy decision to legalize. I would suggest that the effective date or the implementation date for opening stores be timed to give the responsible agencies time to staff up and promulgate appropriate regulations.
It should never have been made illegal in the first place, and the fact that millions of people, largely black and latinx are now ensnared in the crime response system because of the use and sale of a product that is demonstrably less dangerous than alcohol is and will be a stain on this country’s history.
I voted just about right. Info is being gathered through studies, and legislators are having town halls.
The “too fast” people are the same old, same old, unless they’re holding out for something that will make them support it. Marijuana has been with us a long time. We have enough info to proceed now.
Kids are buying it now off the black market, with no regulation. The anti’s need to get their heads out of the sand, or out of some other dark place (if you know what I mean). They are allowing rampant marijuana sales to go to murderous organized criminal organizations, among others in the black market.
Voted just about right, mainly because it’s what I expected. I’d prefer they move faster but we’re talking about legislators who are, by and large, a group of old people. Baby boomers. They move slowly on pretty much everything. Plus, when have old liberals ever done the right thing quickly? They hem, they haw, they second guess themselves, they put too much stock in what oppponents say - but eventually they get there. They will on this too.
Voted too slow, but that is because the Governor wants to get everyone into a room first. That’s how good ideas die. At this point, get a bill written so we can stop speculating and get to the negotiating. Norseman is right about needing agencies time to staff and come up with appropriate regulations. That should be the slow part of the process.
As long as we can get it done in such a way that we don’t have to depend on black or grey market suppliers to meet demand, I don’t care how long it takes. But if we really want to end the violence and exploitation of the black market trade, we shouldn’t legalize in such a way that it defeats that purpose.
- Former Downstater - Friday, Mar 22, 19 @ 3:32 pm:
I understand the argument the debate over marijuana legalization has been ongoing for much longer than the last few months of this legislative session. That said, I still believe it behooves legislators to dedicate more in-depth time evaluating various unintended consequences of legalization, e.g. possible upticks in DUI cases, whether or not legislation can effectively prevent illegal underground sales in a new legal market, whether competent policies can be established in order to prevent youths from obtaining marijuana, and finally deciding whether or not the best approach is perhaps not legalization but instead extending decriminalization measures (for example making the possession of 30 or more grams a civil offense rather than criminal, statewide)
Can’t understand the foot-dragging. Even after passage, it will take a year to set the administrative rules.
You have to wonder if Dems are hoping they can use this as a get-out-the-vote issue again in 2020.
The state won’t tax wealthy pensioners, but here’s one way to get some tax revenue back from them. They have more disposable income, more time on their hands and more aches and pains. I’m sure they could be a strong customer base for legal weed. Heck, a few may stay retired right here instead of moving to California or Colorado.
Voted too slow. There are more studies on marijuana then there has been on aspirin, and with less side effects including no known overdoses. The money is dangling right there, and multiple states/countries are examples we can use to emulate.
That Moylan “poll” is rediculous. What unfounded nonsense. Legalization is primarily to stop the profit motive to recruit kids into gangs, and the subsequent policing strategy that imperils any young black man.