The Polling Disparity and other News Blunts July 29

The Broadus Effect:
LA Weekly

Of six polls released so far on Prop 19, the November ballot initiative that would legalize marijuana for adults 21 and older, three have the yeas winning easily, while three have it losing narrowly.

What gives? As usual, if you have a polling conundrum, Nate Silver is your man. And in this case, his hypothesis is fascinating.

Silver is the stat whiz who first created a formula for predicting -- with astounding accuracy -- the performance of baseball players. Then, under the pseudonym Poblano, he began analyzing polls to forecast the many outcomes of the long Democratic presidential primary campaign. Then he set up shop as fivethirtyeight.com, which has since been bought by The New York Times. He predicted with uncanny accuracy the 2008 election.

Anyway, Silver notes that three polls in which Prop 19 is winning are "robopolls," meaning they're automated -- you push a number on your phone to respond. In the three where Prop 19 is losing, the pollsters are actual humans asking the respondents questions.

Silver notices something else: Huge spreads in the numbers among African-Americans.

In the robopolls, blacks favor Prop 19 by 28 points or more. In the only human poll where they break out demographics, African-Americans are opposed by 12. There are large disparities among Latino voters, too.

The hypothesis: The automated polls give the respondent a more secure feeling of anonymity and no social stigma, so he feels free to voice his true opinion. (Silver also notes that it's possible the automated polls are having trouble getting a representative sample of African-Americans because they have a lower response rate to robopolls.)

But if indeed black voters are more honest with the robopolls, it would amount to a mirror of the Bradley effect.

More at LA Weekly>>

Federal Inconsistency shouldn't stop the legalization of marijuana
LA Times

The law is the law. If we unquestioningly accepted that maxim, imagine where we would be today. Jim Crow would be alive and well, rivers and skies would be polluted, and women wouldn't be allowed to vote.

Yet such is the mindset of many of those who criticize Proposition 19, the marijuana regulation and taxation initiative on the November ballot. In his July 18 Times Op-Ed article, UCLA public policy professor Mark A.R. Kleiman declares that state legalization "can't be done." He points out, correctly, that if the initiative is successful, the federal marijuana prohibition laws will remain in place. What he assumes, incorrectly, is that federal agents will swarm into California, busting farmers and arresting distributors and shopkeepers, to say nothing of the garden stores that sell them equipment and supplies, the accountants who do their books and the municipal tax officials who delight in assessing and collecting the new tax revenues.

Advertisement

Kleiman might well have uttered, "The law is the law."

But the law is neither absolute nor infallible, and that's why Californians can — and should — legalize, regulate and tax marijuana-related commerce.

The federal-state dynamic concerning marijuana is not complicated. Under our system of federalism, both the states and the feds may prohibit commerce in marijuana, but neither is required to do so. Similarly, during alcohol prohibition (1920-33), commerce in alcoholic beverages was prohibited not only by federal law (the Volstead Act) but by the laws of most states. In 1923, New York repealed its state prohibition laws, leaving enforcement, for the remaining 10 years, entirely to the feds. California voters overwhelmingly did the same thing in 1932, one year before national prohibition was repealed.

Let's think this through. If Proposition 19 passes, two important balls roll into the feds' court. The first is that the sole responsibility and expense of enforcing marijuana prohibition will be shifted to them. After Nov. 2, marijuana "offenders" could be arrested only by federal agents, prosecuted only under federal law, and sentenced only to federal detention.

More at LA Times >>

Prop 19: The Battle of the Polls

San Jose Mercury News Editorial: Vote Yes on Prop 19

Opinion: Decriminalize marijuana: It's far less harmful than alcohol

By Larry A. Bedard, MD
Special to the Mercury News


The California Medical Association in October declared the criminalization of marijuana to be a failed public health policy. Its assessment is appropriate.

Marijuana prohibition is a classic case of the so-called cure (criminalization) being worse than the disease (the private recreational use of marijuana).

Consider the questionable efficacy of our present policy. Forty-three percent of Americans over the age of 12 admit to having used marijuana, and nearly one in 10 Californians use it now. At an estimated $15 billion, marijuana is California's largest cash crop.

Now let's consider the costs of prohibition. In the Golden State, taxpayers spend $300 million annually to arrest and prosecute 60,000 people — largely Latinos and African-Americans — for possessing minor, recreational amounts of marijuana. Prohibition is also empowering drug cartels, particularly criminal enterprises in Mexico, which now reap between 60 percent and 70 percent of their total revenue from the exportation of marijuana to America and threaten to turn Mexico into a "narco" state.

So what's the alternative? In my opinion, it is the passage of Proposition 19, which would legalize, regulate and tax the adult possession, use, production and distribution of marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol.

I do not come to this position cavalierly. I am a board-certified, career emergency physician who witnesses the adverse health effects of licit and illicit drugs daily. Yet the recent RAND report on the financial impact of Proposition 19 reaffirmed my belief that the legalization and regulation of marijuana would make our communities safer and more just.

According to RAND, fewer than 200 total patients were admitted to California hospitals in 2008 for "marijuana abuse or dependence." This relatively low number did not surprise me. In my 35-plus years as an emergency physician in busy ERs in Northern California, I have never needed to admit a patient due to an adverse reaction or medical problem caused by marijuana.

Personally, I have taken care of fewer than 10 patients during my entire professional career whose chief complaint was related to marijuana. Mostly these were parents who were cajoled to smoke by their teenage kids and then experienced an anxious reaction.

Publish Post

More at SJ Mercury >>

Letter from Prop 19

Dear Friend,

When our opponents come after one of our allies, we've got to be ready to fight back. That's why I'm writing you today.

Tomorrow morning, our opponents are holding a press conference in Sacramento to call for the resignation of Alice Huffman, president of the California NAACP, because of the organization's bold endorsement of Proposition 19.

We've got to make sure the NAACP knows we've got their back. Will you take a moment and show your support for Alice Huffman and the NAACP?

Click here to sign our petition in support of Alice Huffman and the NAACP!

We're proud to have the support of the California NAACP because they not only know that the war on drugs has failed -- but that its failure has disproportionately affected African Americans. Arrests of African Americans are double, triple, and quadruple the rate of whites in California's 25 biggest counties, even though studies show that African Americans consume marijuana at lower rates than whites.

You'd think with statistics like these that the NAACP's support would be unquestioned. But the stats have always been on our side -- and that hasn't stopped the politics-as-usual crowd from distorting the facts.

This year, when we pass Prop 19, the dialogue will completely change. But until then, we've got to be bold and stand strong when our allies come under attack.

Please sign our petition in support of Alice Huffman and the NAACP. Let's collect the thousands of signatures we need to show our allies and opponents alike that we'll stand up and be heard when attacks come our way.

Thank you so much for your support.

Sincerely,

Jeff Jones
Proponent, Yes on 19

Latest Poll: 49% Favor Legalization

49% of California voters back legalizing pot, poll finds

With 48% opposed, legalization effort faces a difficult challenge, pollster says.

May 20, 2010|By John Hoeffel, Los Angeles Times

Californians likely to vote in November are evenly split over whether to legalize marijuana, with only a small percentage of the electorate still undecided about the controversial issue, according to a poll conducted last week by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California.

The poll, which surveyed 1,168 likely voters, found that 49% think marijuana use should be made legal, 48% do not and 3% do not know, suggesting that the proponents of the legalization measure will have to wage an expensive and persuasive campaign.

Mark Baldassare, the institute's president and pollster, said the results show the legalization campaign faces serious challenges: "It's always hard to start out when you're not even at 50%."

The Tax Cannabis 2010 campaign, which sponsored the initiative, also released a poll Wednesday that found a similar level of support for the measure among registered voters, but with a much higher percentage undecided. Conducted earlier this month by an independent firm, the survey showed 51% of 800 voters support the initiative, while 40% oppose it and 9% are undecided.

"All the polls continue to show that voters remain interested in replacing a failed policy with a more honest, commonsense solution," said Dan Newman, a campaign spokesman.

More at LA Times>>

Rand Paul Wins Senate Primary!

KENTUCKY: In a victory for the Tea Party and libertarian ideals over the left leaning G.O.P. establishment, Rand Paul has won the Republican primary for the Senate defeating G.O.P. favorite and party liner Trey Grayson.

Paul, a 47-year-old Bowling Green eye surgeon, had never before run for office and is the son of former presidential candidate U.S. Rep. Ron Paul.

Why is this being hailed on a cannabis blog? These are some quotes by the forward thinking gentleman:

Paul Criticized The Gonzalez v. Raich Decision Which Allows For Federal Enforcement Against California Medicinal Marijuana Crops. “But from those decisions we kept widening and widening, and now we have sort of the Gonzalez v. Raich decision where they say, California wants to allow medical marijuana, and the federal government comes in and says, ‘Oh no, that defies the commerce clause also because that marijuana looks like other marijuana that could be sold interstate.’ So therefore even though you’re growing it, your own plants and using it for medicinal uses, that that somehow qualifies as interstate commerce.”(AntiWar.com’s “Antiwar Radio With Scott Horton,” www.youtube.com, 5/15/09)

On the Drug Enforcement Administration: “I Would Favor A More Local Approach To Drugs.”

“Paul said that on federal drug laws, he believes ‘most policies of crime and punishment should be and are addressed at the state level.’ He wouldn’t say if the U.S. laws should be done away with or if the Drug Enforcement Administration should be disbanded, but he said, ‘I would favor a more local approach to drugs.’” (Joseph Gerth, Op-Ed, “Can Paul Win Kentucky Senate Race?” The [Louisville, KY] Courier-Journal, 10/19/09)

On Marijuana Legalization: “It’s a state issue"

WASHINTON WIRE: So do you think drugs should be legalized? RAND PAUL: “It’s a state issue. All issues of crime are better addressed at the state level.” (Peter Walsten, “Q&A with Rand Paul,” Wall Street Journal’s Washington Wire Blog, 11/12/2009)

Congratulations Mr. Rand Paul!

ABC Debate: Marijuana Legalization

ABC News Twitter Cast - Legalization Debate featuring Allen St. Pierre, NORML Executive Director
part 1: http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/vide...alize-10669238

part 2: http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/vide...alize-10669269

part 3: http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/vide...alize-10669334

part 4: http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/vide...alize-10669366

Washington Legalization initiative gains ground

Olympian File Photo

The statewide legalization of marijuana is the subject of a proposed initiative in Washington state that, if the necessary requirements are met, will be on the ballot in November.

As read from the initiative itself, “This measure would remove state civil and criminal penalties for persons 18 years or older who cultivate, possess, transport, sell, or use marijuana. Restrictions and penalties for persons under 18 would be retained.”

Initiative 1068 is officially sponsored by the group Sensible Washington and was co-authored by Seattle attorneys Doug Hiatt and Jeffrey Steinborn, Vivian McPeak, founder of Seattle’s Hempfest, Ric Smith, Cannabis Defense Coalition spokesman and former Seattle Weekly contributor Philip Dawdy, who also serves as the movement’s campaign director.

“We waste about $100 million a year enforcing outdated marijuana laws,” Dawdy said. “Considering the harmlessness of the substance we’re talking about, the state is really wasting a lot of money.”

Dawdy stated that if passed into law, I-1068 would also allow farmers to grow hemp and would clean up medical marijuana laws, which he believes “are a disaster.”

In order for this initiative to be on the ballot in November, a statutory requirement of 241,153 signatures from citizens who are registered to vote by July 2 is needed, though Sensible Washington has set a goal of approximately 320,000 signatures to make up for invalid signatures.

“My boss has not authorized me to give the exact number of signatures we have, but I can tell you we’re about one-third of the way there,” said Dawdy. “We’re positioned right where we want to be; most signatures come in June.”

More at the Olympian>>

Marijuana legalization leads all candidates in Colorado!

Poll: Marijuana Legalization Tops All Colorado Gubernatorial and Senate Candidates

According to a statewide poll released this week by Rasmussen Reports, marijuana legalization is more popular in Colorado than any of the candidates running for governor and the U.S. Senate.

According to Rasmussen, a full 49 percent of Coloradans support legalizing and taxing marijuana, and only 39 percent think it should remain illegal. With the remaining 13 percent undecided, these new numbers might give a likely new legalization ballot measure this year some real ammunition.

Marijuana legalization -- 49%

Senate
Jane Norton (vs. Bennet) -- 48%
Ken Buck (vs. Bennet) -- 48%
Tom Wiens (vs. Romanoff) -- 45%

Governor
Scott McInnis (vs. Hickenlooper) -- 47%
John Hickenlooper (vs. McInnis) -- 41%

Snipped from the Huff!>>