politics
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.
- 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.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
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
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
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/08/29/2024-19370/schedules-of-controlled-substances-rescheduling-of-marijuana
It’s moving slowly because the DEA and police want it to stay illegal because that’s where half their funding comes from
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.
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.
He’s too old. Society has moved beyond him on this and it’s an example of why we need to start electing younger people.
Is anyone actually surprised that Biden is extremely anti-narcotics given his son's battle with drug addiction?
Harris doesn't have the same baggage. If she were at the helm, I think she'd follow through.
But that's just the point. Part of marijuana adoption is getting away from worse drugs. There is plenty of supporting data at this point. The sooner people see this they'll see where the bar ought to be set. This is only one example of course.
One of the best ways to get through withdrawal symptoms is Marijuana. When I was getting off some pretty rough mental meds, Marijuana allowed me to keep going.
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.
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
I figure you're partially joking but they can't really make it 2. The HHS recommendation was 3 and even the DEA kind of has to agree even if they don't want to. It would have been super controversial to do something else, they're mainly supposed to follow it through with the rulemaking process unless they're willing to make a serious case. And even then it would probably be to leave it where it is.
One of the theories going around as to why they added the hearing is that they wanted to take the heat off themselves for the call they've made by really drawing out the public consultation. Like people will be mad at them for following the recommendation so they want to make a big show of the fact they're listening to concerns etc.
Hopefully Harris can take some stronger action or legalize through executive order or something. Schedule III is better but it's then in the same class as ketamine. No judgement of people who like ketamine but COME ON
Interesting, didn't know that about the process, TIL. So am I reading you right that they're effectively locked into reschedule to 3 no matter what now due to the HHS recommendation? Or do they still have the option to just not change a thing as well?
Yeah my understanding is that since HHS said "the science suggests it should be in 3," the DEA would have a bit of a challenge making any other rule. The schedules (theoretically) tell you what the addiction risk and medical value of a substance is, with lower risk & more effective medicine being the least restricted. So since HHS made that determination and the DEA are not scientists, it would be kind of wild for them to try to argue with that.
I think technically they could propose anything they like, but 2 would never go through because there's no basis for it, and I think even keeping it in 1 would be a difficult sell with Biden having called for the review and the recommendation being what it was. Plus as you said most public comments (and experts) said they didn't go far enough.
Honestly I think they're stuck. They probably can't just come out and recommend descheduling (and going by public statements probably don't want to) but the current position is untenable. So they have to just sign up for the "better but nobody is especially happy" option HHS gave them
One thing I wish I understood more was whether Harris could just legalize through an executive order. Biden (and now Harris) said nobody should go to jail for weed but schedule III does not solve that problem at all.
The classification problem will lead to the DEA gaining control of all the dispensaries in every state.
Maybe I'm being alarmist, but rescheduling Marijuana is worse than leaving things alone. Oversight by the DEA is the wrong way to go.
Yeah I wouldn't say alarmist but this is likely a non issue. Under the current system, every legal state is breaking federal law in a bunch of ways, but the DEA and other agencies have not acted. Technically putting it in schedule III would mean it could be treated like other substances in that schedule, available only with FDA oversight, but that is not likely. Basically everything has been totally hands off so far, so it's very unlikely that the government reducing the level of control of cannabis would lead to agencies increasing their control.
The biggest threat at the moment imo is a Trump presidency, but based on his comments about Florida's ballot initiative, his "change with the wind" opinion is currently also in favor of not sending people to jail for it.
Schedule 3 for weed is a joke when Xanax and Ambien are schedule 4
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.
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.
So technically, the president could order the people he is in charge of to deschedule the drug and to do it immediately by everyone agreeing that the change is not significant.
If they refuse he could just keep firing people until someone agrees.
The law requires certain time frames for comment periods and he cannot just ignore those. He also cannot just fire anyone he wants. That is one of the things Project 2025 includes. Giving the president to fire any federal employee at will is a bad idea.
The only immediate thing he might do is issue an executive order making Marijuana a very low priority offense and telling DoJ to direct limited enforcement and prosecution resources elswhere.
Well I’m sure the persons in question will be highly motivated to follow through and expedite the process with seal team six accompanying them to work every day
Nope, the president doesn't have the legal authority to give that order. He has the legal authority to order them to consider the question, which is the process that's going on.
Right but he he has the power to fire them, or order someone else to fire them.
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 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.
Wait, are you saying that our national security is run primarily by furries? Serious question, not sure if I'm misunderstanding you.
A massive amount of technical infrastructure is run by furries, both private and public.
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.