How long have Democrats been saying this now?
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
1051 points (98.9% liked)
politics
19238 readers
2227 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Shit. I love that she came out for it but this means the race is closer than we thought. Fuxing vote people!
Canadian here.
It’s been fully legal for… 5 years? We haven’t fallen apart yet!
There’s some people working on that, but they aren’t the stoner type.
Harris is from Oakland. She gets it. There are nice dispensaries everywhere in Oakland. Even in very family-friendly or affluent parts of town.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Paywall, didnt read
The president can order agencies to reschedule it, which makes it defacto legal in a lot of states, and means federal employees in states where it's legal can use, including military.
She should do that asap, because the fight to actually legalize is a lot harder.
I don't want to see her say it needs to be legalized and then refuse to take any step thats not the hardest
Holy shit the NSA, FBI and CIA will finallyl get competent, weed smoking engineers.
There would be full divisions of stoned furries.
PirateSoftware's CEO, Thor, once saidnl in a stream how national security relies on furry conventions flights making it to and from conventions safely, and that there is nearly no bigger single point of failure on our security infrastructure. Those planes go down and we have a serious problem.
I think he's right.
Wait, are you saying that our national security is run primarily by furries? Serious question, not sure if I'm misunderstanding you.
That is what Thor implied in the stream I'm scanning for it so I can link it. I found this quickly but struggling to find the thing In referring to.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Wait the CEO of PirateSoftware is named Thor? I cant tell if thats extremely cool or extremely dorky, actually its both I named my dog Malcador and have a kitten named Jurgen I cant judge.
I mean it's both, that dude has a voice pretty close to what you'd want a programmer named Thor to sound like. He runs a ferret rescue. He used to be Red Team for DoD and would Penntest nuclear power facilities, and now runs a gaming studio. Very interesting dude.
Edit: His father is the WoW guy from South Park. And If you ever got banned from World of Warcraft for cheating, it was Thor's team that probably caught you.
Rescheduling is a lot more complicated than that. The president can not just wave a wand and make it legal. Congress could pass a law doing so, but they are not going to do that. The other way is via the Controlled Substances Act which is, to put it mildly, is a cluster fuck.
In a nutshell, administrative rescheduling begins when an actor—the Secretary of Health and Human Services or an outside interested party—files a petition with the Attorney General or he initiates the process himself. The Attorney General forwards the request to the HHS Secretary asking for a scientific and medical evaluation and recommendation, as specified by 23 USC 811(b-c). HHS, via the Food and Drug Administration conducts an assessment and returns a recommendation to the Attorney General “in a timely manner.” The Attorney General, often through the Drug Enforcement Administration, conducts its own concurrent and independent review of the evidence in order to determine whether a drug should be scheduled, rescheduled, or removed from control entirely—depending on the initial request in the petition.
If the Attorney General finds sufficient evidence that a change in scheduling is warranted he then initiates the first stages of a standard rulemaking process, consistent with the Administrative Procedures Act. During rulemaking and consistent with Executive Order 12866, if the White House—through the Office of Management and Budget’s Office of information and Regulatory Affairs—determines the rule to be “significant,” it will conduct a regulatory review of the proposed rule—a very likely outcome given the criteria in the EO.
FYI, Biden already initiated this process to reschedule marijuana in 2022. At this point, it has been reviewed and the Attorney General has submitted a rule change to the DEA. They will have a public comment period which they will no doubt drag out as long as possible. If approved, marijuana will be reclassified at the same level as steroids (schedule III). It is disappointing that Biden only requested changing the schedule rather than descheduling it all together. Not ideal, but a hell of a lot better than now.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Biden already started that process to move it to schedule 3. It's been moving through slowly but it's got a public hearing on December 2nd
The public comments were overwhelmingly in favor of full deschedule/legalization, but all he's pushing for is reschedule to 3, which means they'll probably go to 2 because fuck you that's why. Hopefully Harris can lean into it a little harder than Biden has.
The public comments were overwhelmingly in favor of full deschedule/legalization, but all he's pushing for is reschedule to 3, which means they'll probably go to 2 because fuck you that's why
The Lesser Evil Party in a nutshell 😮💨
Granted, it's of course still a MUCH lesser evil than the American Fascist Party, but fucking HELL! Your very bleak guess is probably the best case scenario with these fuckers!
As a senator Harris introduced bills that would've fully legalized it. Meanwhile I don't think Biden ever publicly said he wanted full legalization
I think there's pretty good odds she would go further than Biden in executive action alone
Biden was calling it a gateway drug just before entering the office of president. I don't believe he's evolved personally at all. Policy, which is kind of weak, may be another thing. But I don't think the man sees any value in marijuana, for anybody.
Yeah at best Biden probably only is in favor of it for textile products and maybe CBD derivatives for medical use. Which mind you is still a massive improvement over damned near every president since it was putlawed but still a woefully insufficient, a solid summary of Biden now that I think about it.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Here's hoping!
Plus this post is literally about her going to the "All The Smokes" podcast and calling for legal weed there. Could not imagine Biden doing
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)