Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition
Next Post: AFL-CIO accused of sexism by Kennedy fundraiser
Posted in:
* Lots and lots of words, but Chris Kennedy seems to be learning a little as the campaign moves ahead…
AUDIENCE MEMBER: My question is, would you legalize marijuana so this state would not go down the drain like all the others? Like [inaudible]
KENNEDY: I would do this. I would follow the advice of scientists and doctors. If the scientists and doctors and the recovery community said, ‘you should not do that because you’ll create a public health hazard,’ I wouldn’t legalize marijuana simply to get us out of a budget mess, I would tax the rich people who can do that. We don’t need to do that. But I would defer to science, I don’t think it should be a politician that makes that decision.
And we should, within six months of the next governor’s term, we should charge the University of Illinois with reviewing all of the studies that have been done and decide whether it should be legalized or not and how to legalize it. I talked to the governor of Colorado last Friday. So, he said, ‘Look we legalized it, but we didn’t know it would come as gummy bears.’ So, a bunch of kids ate gummy bears and ended up at the children’s hospital in Denver. Because we didn’t know that they should come in a medical container with a screw top lid that only an adult should open. So, they had to go back and re-regulate.’ Then he said the THC, which is the chemical in there, the THC is much stronger than it was when – I was familiar with the topic back in the 80’s, so it’s like 10 times stronger. There’s no regulation in Colorado, at least the way he said it, that regulates how much THC can be administered in one dose. Which means that for the first time in history, like in 10,000 years of human history, people can overdose from marijuana. You’re saying no you can’t –
AUDIENCE MEMBER: – Well, alcohol. You can overdose with alcohol.
KENNEDY: We should defer to science, and what we should say is, OK what do the rules look like? What would be good? Is it OK? Is it like liquor? If it’s like booze, they say it’s not a public health hazard, let’s do it. But let’s make sure we’ve got the right container, let’s make sure that we don’t have a dose that’s too high. Let’s learn from what other states have done. That’s what I say.
The thing is in America, this is interesting, the Republicans in the Senate and in the House, have stopped the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institutes of Health from studying this question. There’s no study. The federal government is prevented from studying whether or not we should legalize marijuana. That’s like crazy, because politicians got involved where they should have differed to the scientists. In the state of Illinois we regulated medical marijuana. The doctors said, ‘oh no we should use it for many diseases.’ And they said ‘No, no, no, just a few,’ because the politicians substituted their own judgement for doctors and scientists. That’s ridiculous, we should defer to doctors, you should defer to science, there is truth and we should respect it. Let them decide and then we’ll do whatever they decide.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: I feel that God gave us this beautiful plant. Why does there have to be so much regulation?
KENNEDY: And I think I would just ask a doctor or a scientist that’s all I’m saying. I can’t argue with your point.
* Video…
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:14 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition
Next Post: AFL-CIO accused of sexism by Kennedy fundraiser
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Well the “God gave us this beautiful plant” talk is a little cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs from the questioner, but Kennedy’s answers still seem to fall in the “too long, didn’t read [or listen to]” category.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:18 am
Silly boy.. Out of one side of his mouth he wants the CDC to report on guns. Hate to tell him but the CDC haa fairly extensive info on marijuana.
Comment by Blue dog dem Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:18 am
1. Marijuana won’t solve the budget crisis in Illinois. 2. You can overdose on almost anything, OTC medicine, caffeine,THC, etc. 3. God gave us Coca plants to…and poison ivy…etc.
Not that I care if or rather when it’s legalized…but these are very common ‘arguments’ for legalization. Why not use the argument, it is our freedom to consume Marijuana or the sort? That’d make more logical sense.
Comment by Shanks Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:26 am
Kennedy is hiding behind doctors and scientists because he doesn’t want to come out and say he’s against marijuana legalization. Doctors and scientists don’t sign legislation, but a Governor does.
If Kennedy is so concerned about what doctors and scientists have to say on the subject, why is he completely ignorant on the voluminous research that has already been done about this?
And the rhetoric about kids and marijuana is a bunch of bull. Do you think street dealers are putting marijuana in child safe packaging today? Are there no instances of kids ingesting THC in states where marijuana illegal? It’s a nonsensical argument, but it is the default argument of people who don’t want it legalized.
Comment by TopHatMonocle Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:27 am
If God gave us marijuana, God also gave us the opium poppy. Anyone want to legalize heroin about now?
Comment by Ron Burgundy Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:28 am
Okay, I thought he was totally against legalization. Now I’m even more confused.
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:31 am
It is still impossible to overdose on cannabis regardless of what any politician or commenter thinks. No amount of breeding or concentrating will ever make cannabinoids potent enough to kill. The body itself prevents it. Take that misinformation back to the 80s.
Comment by Homer J. Quinn Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:33 am
Kennedy just needs to blurt out “Smoke ‘em if you got ‘em” or “You put your weed in there, man” and cut to the chase.
Comment by Curl of the Burl Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:33 am
===Hate to tell him but the CDC haa fairly extensive info on marijuana.===
Can you enlighten us? What does the CDC have to say about marijuana?
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:33 am
==people can overdose from marijuana==
Um, no. Kids can get into their parents stash (intentionally or unintentionally) and go to the ER for observation.
The audience member seems to forget that God gave us belladonna.
Comment by Jocko Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:36 am
Good on Kennedy to not pander and jump at legalization just for votes or this pie in the sky idea that its the magic drug that will save the state’s finances.
I think he is positioned well on this issue, we need to know what should be the legal limit to operate vehicles and how it effects reaction times first not after. Public safety and health should be our main concerns.
Comment by I'll see you on the beach Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:36 am
Was sitting around a business meeting the other day Downstate in a room that had a mix of political backgrounds. Fiscal/social conservatives, moderates, and liberals.Somehow Colorado’s marijuana legalization came up and no one was opposed to Illinois doing it to get tax revenue. It was more a feeling like why haven’t they done this already to help the budget. These weren’t hippies going on about a natural plant they enjoy but professionals just thinking practically.
I think that is where the vast majority of this state is but politicians have failed to keep up.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:38 am
- Shanks -
“You can overdose on almost anything…”
You are so right. Most people don’t know that consuming too much water (hyperhydration) can result in an overdose.
- Ron Burgundy -
“Anyone want to legalize heroin about now?”
Please.. that’s a pretty weak red herring.
Comment by We'll See Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:39 am
47th. Try google. But I personally dont care what they do. Old Blue has inadvertently inhaled some bad s… In my days.
Comment by Blue dog dem Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:40 am
Speaking of marijuana. Maybe Kennedy should consult Bill Clinton on how to answer this question.
Comment by Blue dog dem Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:42 am
===47th. Try google.===
So you’re just making stuff up?
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:44 am
Ron Burgundy: opium poppies are legal to grow and possess but not to consume. You can buy the seeds legally at any Walmart garden center.
Comment by Homer J. Quinn Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:46 am
–Please.. that’s a pretty weak red herring.–
Uh, I have no problem with marijuana. I was mocking the goofy questioner.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:46 am
47th. No. I just don’t know how to attach a link. But I typed in CDC study on marijuana and found some good reading.
Comment by Blue dog dem Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:46 am
==I think he is positioned well on this issue==
He’s really not. Legalization has sky-high approval, especially in a Democratic primary, especially among the Bernie-types he needs to consolidate.
There’s obviously a lot of important work we’d have to leg out to pursue legalization, but I don’t think any of the activists want or expect it to just be the wild west.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:47 am
Good deflections don’t have such easy follow-ups. Like: “which scientist should we asK?” and “if a bunch of doctors come to you and say do it, will you?” and “will you commit to informing yourself by talking to doctors and then choose an actual position?”
He’s terrible on this question. If you don’t like pot, say it. You can’t hide behind doctors forever. What happens when a pro-marijuana doctor is the one asking him the question?
Comment by PJ Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:50 am
47th - the CDC has an entire subpage on marijuana studies.
https://www.cdc.gov/marijuana/index.htm
Comment by Curl of the Burl Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:50 am
Thanks Curl. How do you do that attaching thingy.
Comment by Blue dog dem Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:52 am
By the way, the AMA has some studies too.
Comment by Blue dog dem Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:53 am
The CDC will tell you no one has every died from Cannabis use. The CDC will tell you it has been used for thousands of years and was only removed from the MERCK Manual for political, not Public Health reasons. You will find out cannabis causes Cancer cells to die. They call it ‘apotosis’. Just go to CDC.gov and search Cannabis.
In 1988, DEA Administrative Law Judge Francis Young held hearings and determined it to be safe and effective medicine and should be rescheduled. Kennedy is just being a goofball.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:54 am
He is either uninformed or as I suspect, simply not a proponent of legalization. A politico dancing around this issue is telling the people that his won’t-pick-a-lane stance is what we can expect should he be elected. Enough of that nonsense. Deferring to science when he knows good and well that it’s practically impossible for scientists to do research due to the CSA schedule 1 is kicking the can down the road. Also, while the tax revenue is appealing, it’s not the logic we should be using at the forefront of the discussion. What needs to be promoted is the ugly side of political science (racism and cultural bigotry) that was the impetus for the prohibition. 30,000,000 arrests of citizens for possession of small amounts of marijuana at a cost exceeding one trillion dollars. Is the efficacy of the prohibition intact? Has it even provided the most fundamental expectation of the people…keeping it out of the hands of our children? An emphatic no. We’ve been patient; 50 years worth of patience that is living proof that it’s time for a change. Mr. Kennedy there are in excess of 25,000 research papers available covering a plant that has never killed anyone. Pick a lane or get the hey out. We don’t need anymore can kickers.
Comment by Neophyte Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 10:59 am
In regards to gummy bears, maybe Kennedy would be interested in knowing that the Illinois medical cannabis program is heavily regulated and Illinois has regulations regarding infused products. Here is one of the rules that may be of interest: “Depictions of the product, cartoons or images other than the cultivation center’s logo. Medical cannabis-infused products shall not bear a reasonable resemblance to any product available for consumption as a commercially available candy.” http://www.ilga.gov/commission/jcar/admincode/008/008010000E04200R.html
Comment by LouLecture Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:01 am
Gummy bears????
Comment by Blue dog dem Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:06 am
Thanks Curl,
The CDC web page is interesting. Right at the top it says there is strong evidence that marijuana is addictive. Then, if you read the full report that is highlighted on the page, it says it is not addictive.
I think the CDC wrote the headlines before it read its own study. Heavy marijuana use may lead to dependency and increase one’s tolerance, but it is not addictive.
See for your self.
http://nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2017/Cannabis-Health-Effects/Cannabis-chapter-highlights.pdf
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:10 am
By Kennedy’s logic, he would favor making illegal what the medical community has determined to be much greater public health hazards: tobacco and alcohol.
It’s been done. Didnt work as hoped. But a lot of murderous gangsters got rich and corrupted the heck out of public institutions.
In fact, Grandpa Joe made a fortune on illegal hooch, working with some of his less publicly embraced associates. And continued to make money off booze once it was legal again.
And, please, spare us the “kids and gummy bears” scare tactics. The same ridiculous argument applies to tobacco and booze, too.
We’re talking adults here, making their own choices. It’s 2017: give us your good reasons why you would use the law to prevent them from legally choosing weed.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:14 am
Blue dog dem- if your gummy bears ??? was directed at me, I was referring to this statement by Kennedy: “And we should, within six months of the next governor’s term, we should charge the University of Illinois with reviewing all of the studies that have been done and decide whether it should be legalized or not and how to legalize it. I talked to the governor of Colorado last Friday. So, he said, ‘Look we legalized it, but we didn’t know it would come as gummy bears.’ So, a bunch of kids ate gummy bears and ended up at the children’s hospital in Denver. Because we didn’t know that they should come in a medical container with a screw top lid that only an adult should open. So, they had to go back and re-regulate.’ Then he said the THC, which is the chemical in there, the THC is much stronger than it was when – I was familiar with the topic back in the 80’s, so it’s like 10 times stronger. There’s no regulation in Colorado, at least the way he said it, that regulates how much THC can be administered in one dose. Which means that for the first time in history, like in 10,000 years of human history, people can overdose from marijuana. You’re saying no you can’t –”
The Illinois medical program is heavily regulated.
Comment by LouLecture Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:15 am
Ask and you shall receive. Looks like Rauner knows about these gummy bears
Comment by Blue dog dem Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:18 am
RB, heroin is legal in the form of prescription opioids.
Compare and contrast the well-documented public health risks of legal opioids and illegal marijuana. Same with illegal marijuana and legal tobacco and booze.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:18 am
There is nothing silly about pointing out that marijuana is a beautiful plant, because many believe it is, aesthetically as well as for its uses.
The Grandson of Man attests to its God-given beauty, as it was provided to people out of the love that the Grandfather has for his creation, that they may responsibly enjoy it and use it for health purposes, to substitute human-made drugs that harm and kill.
As for Kennedy, he may defer to legalization opponents and not consider the many benefits legalization should bring.
The argument against legalization, that it’s not a budget panacea, is false and misleading. Of course it’s not a fiscal cure-all, but it should help, a lot, for local governments and the state.
Comment by Grandson of Man Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:18 am
So if we’re classifying drugs and their legality by likelihood of an overdose then he must want to bring back prohibition, right? Weed has never killed anyone. Booze on the other hand..
Comment by DrurysMissingClock Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:20 am
Considering the state constitution prevents a ballot referendum on this, legalization has to be done politically through legislation.
Because of this reality, the political process of marijuana legalization is going to involve a lot of horse trading, and what comes out the other end of the sausage maker is going to be political. There’s no way around it. It’s a nice dream to think it will only be 100% based on science, but I don’t see that happening.
Unfortunately, my dem rep is one of the “won’t someone please think of the children” types, who as far as I can tell from my numerous attempts to contact her on this issue, is 100% against any sort of legalization. She didn’t even support the decriminalization bill. It matters not to her that it will still be illegal for children, and illegal to sell to children.
Legalizing marijuana in this state is not going to happen unless there is a relentless drumbeat directed at every single legislator. If you want it to happen, call your legislators and tell them to co-sponsor Senate bill SB 316, and the House version, HB 2353. Remind them constantly that you are watching whether they join up in this effort. Then include in any correspondence to them a CC: to their competitors. Let them know if they don’t follow the will of the people who put them there, then someone else will be put there in their place.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:22 am
Good for Kennedy.
It’s quite refreshing to hear someone be reasonable on the issue and not just go along with the crowd. It’s been the lone bright spot of his campaign.
Comment by Saluki Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:23 am
I seriuosly dont know this. Is driving under the influence of marijuana as driving under the influence of alcohol?
Comment by Blue dog dem Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:23 am
Dangerous.
Comment by Blue dog dem Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:25 am
Mr. Kennedy it seems the short answer is no you are not in favor of legalization and my short answer is no I will not vote for you. See how easy that is.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:28 am
–I seriuosly dont know this. Is driving under the influence of marijuana as driving under the influence of alcohol–
It can be, and is just as illegal. From what I understand it is just more difficult to field test for, unless a cloud comes floating out of the car.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:28 am
I’ve just returned from morning rush hour in Dallas area. One benefit of pot might have the effect of slowing drivers speed down to 85 mph. On the frontage roads. I-30 is a lost cause.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:34 am
By the way, is Chris speaking of potential danger of pot…in a bar?
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:37 am
- DrurysMissingClock - Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:20 am: …he must want to bring back prohibition, right?
DMC, there is a lot of territory to cover before we reach ‘prohibition’. One would be to ban all alcohol advertising from TV and Radio. It is sad to see beer advertisements on at 10:30 am Saturday morning broadcast TV for a Soccer match. We could also eliminate the tax deductibility for advertising and marketing expenses. We could increase the Liquor Excise tax. We could require Servers at restaurants be 21 and be trained and licensed to serve, so they do not over serve. We could have public health advertisements regarding alcohol and cancer risks. We could increase the $400 fee for a Liquor Warehousemen’s License to a percentage of sales. Washington State has a much higher Liquor tax than Illinois. There is a lot we could do, but won’t do.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:38 am
==The CDC web page is interesting. Right at the top it says there is strong evidence that marijuana is addictive. Then, if you read the full report that is highlighted on the page, it says it is not addictive.
I think the CDC wrote the headlines before it read its own study. Heavy marijuana use may lead to dependency and increase one’s tolerance, but it is not addictive.==
Actually, the line about marijuana may have been added by the Trump appointees. They have been adding politically motivated ledes to a lot of science-based research that contradicts their beliefs.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:43 am
**I seriuosly dont know this. Is driving under the influence of marijuana as driving under the influence of alcohol?**
Try google.
Comment by JoeMaddon Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:43 am
Paterakis the Weed Dude
Comment by Paterakis for Prez Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:50 am
I believe that legal marijuana tax revenue could be better used, in part, toward traffic enforcement for intoxicated driving. Now we are locking people up for weed, and we’re spending money that we could be saving or using for better purposes.
We wasted so much time and money in Cook County on misdemeanor marijuana court cases that went nowhere. Why not instead collect revenue and use it for good instead of wasting it?
Comment by Grandson of Man Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:53 am
Joe. I tried.
Comment by blue dog dem Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 11:58 am
It’s rich, all this hand wringing about marijuana prohibition by a candidate who is the descendant and benefactor of a bootlegger turned alcohol mogul.
Comment by CookR Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 12:00 pm
*Beneficiary
Comment by CookR Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 12:06 pm
Blue dog—-I am not an expert but from my personal experience have never seen a crash where someone smoked too much pot and was driving 100mph like a nut. Have seen them drive 20 tho. Also have never seen anyone smoke pot and want to fight everybody in a bar, or go home and beat the wife and kids.
Comment by SOIL M Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 12:09 pm
Anon. @ 11:38 am. Strict regulation that accompanies legalization like: cannabis businesses can be no closer than 1,000 ft. from a school or church is a head-scratcher for me. We allow drug stores on strategic corners regardless of thei proximity to schools. Drug stores that sell drugs that can kill you; drug stores that also sell tobacco products; drug stores that also sell alcohol and allow children to peruse the merchandise unfettered. I don’t get it.
Comment by Neophyte Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 12:16 pm
Blue dog dem- I wouldn’t give Rauner credit for the rules, the initial program rules were developed under Quinn. Illinois reviewed audit fundings from other states and visited a few states. Rauner originally indicated the program was tainted and suggested the licenses should be given away as a lottery selection, instead of a competitive scoring progress. Every state is watching the Illinois program and some are using the IL program as a model.
If Rauner knew anything about those gummy bears and the medical cannabis program, his administration would be working to expand the program to help address the opiate crisis and bring in additional revenues.
Comment by LouLecture Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 12:23 pm
Lou. I was being flippant. I saw that Rauner and Co. Inked a deal with Haribo bringing in 55 jobs. Haribo must make gummy bears. Old people himor. Sorry
Comment by Blue dog dem Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 12:42 pm
If Kennedy supported legalizing marijuana, he would just say so.
He doesn’t.
Which is why he keeps giving the same answer that Republicans give on global warming when they are standing in front of a room of Sierra Club members and don’t want to have rocks thrown at them.
Kennedy doesn’t want to get stoned. It’s that simple.
Comment by Thomas Paine Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 1:52 pm
If you read Kennedy’s issues page, his position on the legalization of marijuana is concise and (IMO) sensitive. This story is fueled by the deficit of discipline of both a first time candidate and of the audience members who feel strongly about the issue.
We have two candidates attempting to buy an election. We have a national spotlight on the unjust treatment of immigrants, women and people of color. As a member of the political class, I urge my peers not to lose perspective or indulge in sensationalism.
Comment by Anon Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 2:08 pm
Not sure if I would have voted for him anyway, but he certainly has lost my vote over this issue. If you are gonna be this backwards on such an obvious public policy issue, I don’t have faith in you.
Comment by Just Observing Friday, Oct 13, 17 @ 2:19 pm