The OC Blog Back Issues Our Mission Contact Us Masthead
Sudsy Wants You to Join the Oregon Commentator

Possible 2010 Ballot Initiative to Legalize Pot

Proponents of legalizing pot have begun collecting signatures to place an initiative on the 2010 ballot that would decriminalize marijuana in Oregon. Sounds groovy, right? Well …

The Oregon Liquor Control Commission would manage the program, which would license approved individuals to cultivate the product for sale.

Oy vey! If you thought the OLCC’s alcohol regulations were asinine, just wait until they have control of weed. Even if passed, I wonder how effective the program would be when citizens are given the choice between trying to navigate all of the OLCC’s sure-to-be maddening regulations or just going to a black market dealer.

A similar initiative might end up on California’s ballot this November.

  1. Chris V. DCC says:

    Now, I grew up here in Oregon , and I remember when I was a kid. This was not too long ago, I

  2. Pat Ryan says:

    Since weed is still one of our major sources of economic activity, wouldn’t it be cool if we could design a tax scheme that……..oh, lets say for example…..directed all proceeds to rural counties suffering from lost timber revenue?

    And yeah, I realize that we’re on a tax hata site…….but still…….

  3. Timothy says:

    Raisch makes most of that moot, though. BOO COMMERCE CLAUSE JURIS PRUDENCE SINCE Wickard!

  4. Believe me, I’d prefer marijuana were free to grow, buy, sell, and use like tomatoes. But the reason OCTA gives monopoly control of marijuana to OLCC is to conform to international treaties regarding the cultivation and distribution of drugs. It’s part of the defense platform for the inevitable federal court challenges. We follow the international treaties, which along with the Constitution outrank federal statutes (like, say, the Controlled Substances Act) and we mandate all sales, production, and use through state control to keep it intrastate and not run afoul of the Constitution’s interstate commerce clause.

    And personally, I want the buying of cannabis by adults to be enough of a pain in the ass that it decreases teen availability and use. I think most people could handle going to a adults-only liquor store and showing ID to get a little bud. I know it couldn’t be any more expensive and inconvenient than getting $300 from an ATM, calling or paging a dealer, hoping he has some in stock, not knowing how good or bad it will be, waiting the inevitable 30-90 minutes of dealer-standard-time for him to arrive, and worrying whether this guy’s really a narc and you’re getting busted.

  5. Niedermeyer says:

    Sorry Josh M, but it would most certainly not be a step in the right direction. Chopping the OLCC into tiny, tiny little pieces and burying them in the far corners of the world… now that would be a step in the right direction.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for paranoia-free tokage, but giving the OLCC control of anything more is just patently Not A Good Idea. I say this as someone who broke down and cried in a California Trader Joes when I realized how cheap and stress-free booze buying can be. Just imagine how expensive and inconvenient the OLCC could make your bud-buying experience.

    Just say no!

  6. Josh M. says:

    All valid points, but I have to think that this would still be a step in the right direction.

  7. Timothy says:

    And it’s not like the DEA will leave it alone either.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.