Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday called on the federal government to move “as quickly as possible” to change the way it officially classifies marijuana, saying that “nobody should have to go to jail for smoking weed.”

“I cannot emphasize enough that they need to get to it as quickly as possible,” Harris said. “We need to have a resolution based on their findings and their assessment. This issue is stark when one considers the fact that on the schedule currently, marijuana is considered as dangerous as heroin ― as dangerous as heroin ― and more dangerous than fentanyl, which is absurd, not to mention patently unfair.”

Marijuana is currently listed as a Schedule 1 drug by the Drug Enforcement Administration. That classification designates it one of the most dangerous drugs possible, with no medicinal uses. Other substances in the same category include heroin, ecstasy and LSD. Marijuana advocates have been pushing for years for the federal government to either reschedule marijuana to a different category or deschedule it entirely.

151 points

Harris oversaw more than 1,900 marijuana convictions in San Francisco, previously unreported records from the DA’s office show. Her prosecutors appear to have convicted people on marijuana charges at a higher rate than under her predecessor, based on data about marijuana arrests in the city.

As the political winds blow with her I guess. At least it’s a positive change.

permalink
report
reply
103 points

Eh.

That was when it went from jail to a fine though.

So lots of people stopped giving a shit and started smoking publicly.

And she’s been pro legalization for years now.

There’s lots of shit to criticize Biden and Harris on, but Harris’s time as a DA and her cannabis conviction just isn’t a good one.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

“Under Harris, the D.A.'s office obtained more than 1,900 convictions for marijuana offenses, including persons simultaneously convicted of marijuana offenses and more serious crimes.[73] The rate at which Harris’s office prosecuted marijuana crimes was higher than the rate under Hallinan, but the number of defendants sentenced to state prison for such offenses was substantially lower.[73] Prosecutions for low-level marijuana offenses were rare under Harris, and go her office had a policy of not pursuing jail time for marijuana possession offenses.”

From her Wikipedia page (the reference is pay walled and im not invested enough to figure it out).

permalink
report
parent
reply
61 points
*

As an AG, it was her role to uphold the law and bring forward prosecutions.

I’m recognizing positive change, which is an option now with her new role

Edit I’ll also acknowledge it’s an election year and this is a popular topic TOO

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

As an AG it’s her role to use discretion in bringing forward cases based on her interpretation of her mandate. That’s why it’s a political position.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

They campaigned on this 4 years ago. They’ve done plenty of good things, but this one turned out out to be an empty promise.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

Yea just ignore that Biden directed the relevant federal agencies to get this done and the HHS has already made the recommendation to move it to schedule 3.

Oh and damn, look at this: https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahsinclair/2024/01/18/dea-considers-rescheduling-cannabis-what-this-means-for-us-and-global-reform/?sh=2ce8efef743f

The gears are still moving and the DEA, the agency with the final say according to the legal framework within the controlled substances act, is working on it with the executive branch is actively pushing to have it reclassified.

It’s almost like a bunch of you who are making brand new accounts to make these posts about broken campaign processes have no fucking clue what you’re talking about because, at the very least, you’re not paying any fucking attention.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

A campaign promise is very different than a statement from a sitting official.

This is not an excuse for it not being descheduled yet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
53 points

Sometimes a hypocrite is just a man in the process of changing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I kind of want to create an unexpected Sanderson group…

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

If they’re going with the crowd, that’s societal inertia or peer pressure, not change. Harris is not making a big controversial stand, a majority of Americans want legalization - across demographics, political leanings, and income.

Now if she was advocating heroin prescriptions as a harm reduction, or expunging her own convictions for possession, or a systemic reevaluation of our drug law and enforcement approach? THAT’S a change that shows she understands how the law is bad, not this new political posturing to win votes callously

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

That’s honestly better I think. If she doesn’t personally believe it, but is expressing support for it politically, that means the topic is winning.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Or you’re being suckered again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-17 points

That’s obviously not what’s happening here. These people are scum.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

This view is close minded.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

Or this is what she wants the law to be, that was what she did when her job was to enforce the law that existed back then.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

DAs always have discretion in what cases to drop or move forward, along with being able to offer plea bargains. They aren’t legally required to prosecute everyone who smokes weed, it’s just good optics to a certain political class to do so. And that political class was a much bigger tent even 10-15 years ago.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Also, they talk about marijuana every time there’s an election, then don’t actually change it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Not really a change, though, Biden asked for rescheduling years ago.

permalink
report
parent
reply
84 points

“nobody should have to go to jail for smoking weed”

-The person who made a career putting people in jail for smoking weed

permalink
report
reply
27 points

Harris has been pro weed for years now. One of the foremost issues with our political system in the US is that these people are elected by a constituency that demands a job be done in a way that they want. (I am purposely ignoring the corporate donor aspect for this statement)

The locality (and the era) demanded drug dealers go to jail, so she did her job. Where Harris has floundered is how she talks about it and attonrs for it today.

You can be outspoken about a politicians past, but it’s disingenuous to ignore that a politician has changed, especially so if they have changed with positive progression.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Hey now, the hate boner doesn’t get off on logic, it gets off on mindless hate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I wouldn’t call being angry at a prosecutor putting innocent people into prison blind hate exactly. Certainly I wouldn’t accept the logic that the constituency wanted to put innocent people in prison and that’s why she did it, even if I believe that I would still find that morally repugnant.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Except being a politician is also about image as much as we may not want it to be. Biden being the champion of student loan forgiveness while also being the champion of making student loan debt almost impossible to discharge earlier in his career doesn’t really feel all that great ya know? Same shit with Harris.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Yeah. Can’t trust’em as far as you can throw’em.

permalink
report
parent
reply
61 points

I unironically think that if marijuana should be banned, then so should alcohol

permalink
report
reply
48 points

If they were both first introduced today alcohol would definitely be the one people would want more restricted.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Alcohol can kill you pretty quickly if you’re not careful, IMO it probably should be more restricted than weed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

It’s too easy to make, and weed is too easy to grow, so neither should be restricted since they’re part of our culture and will be consumed anyway. Broadly true for other drugs as well since they can be got, but it’s not like just anyone can make MDMA (which, if taken in a pure and controlled dose, is safer than both cannabis and alcohol incidentally, with therapeutic benefits too).

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Absolutely not true.

As soon as republicans discover it’s easier to convince underaged girls to fuck them if they’re drunk, it’s going legal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

This behavior is not limited to republicans.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

Maybe try reading about the 1920s attempt and get back to us on if you still feel that way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

The difference is I don’t think either should be banned, really. But mainly because the bans just don’t work.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Yeah but this is lemmy, so as soon as you come out with a ridiculous take to satirize the topic at hand, whackos and edgelords will crawl out of the woodwork to support your ridiculous take.

permalink
report
parent
reply
52 points

“Somebody ought to do something about this ASAP,” says one of the only people on the planet actually capable of doing something about it for the last 4 years. OK.

permalink
report
reply
43 points
*

Elections are coming up so it’s time to talk about it and do nothing else that would make it happen

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

Lemmy sees something good happen:

“Not good enough!”

We all know it should have happened before, but dismissing that the vice president just publicly called for this is silly

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points
*

Biden campaigned on rescheduling it so this is just nakedly trying to boost their pre-election popularity. They could’ve done this day one. They didn’t. They won’t.

Web archive of Biden’s campaign site, September 2019: http://web.archive.org/web/20190723224533/https://joebiden.com/justice/

Decriminalize the use of cannabis and automatically expunge all prior cannabis use convictions. Biden believes no one should be in jail because of cannabis use. As president, he will decriminalize cannabis use and automatically expunge prior convictions. And, he will support the legalization of cannabis for medical purposes, leave decisions regarding legalization for recreational use up to the states, and reschedule cannabis as a schedule II drug so researchers can study its positive and negative impacts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Obama campaigned on this so it’s been 12 years they’ve fucked around on it. People need to stop defending the Democratic party for being corrupt pieces of shit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

They’ve been “calling for it” since Biden campaign. And reschedule? It should be descheduled.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

And the DEA is actively working on it, which just so happens to be the final step in rescheduling a drug.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I hate it here for that reason. With this being the last option, I’ve reverted to Google News, NYTimes and SF Chronicle apps. Lemmy’s inability to feel joy has helped me ditch social media most of the time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Reddit very seriously had the same problem.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

It isn’t good enough… we have fucking nothing and there’s been chat about this for close to 2 decades.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Oh sure, every 4 years Lucy comes out with the football and taunts you to take a run at it and I’m the one not being realistic. It’s total horseshit to disappear on an issue every 4 years except when you think it might help you in an election to wave it around.

It’s not “Lemmy sees something good happen”; nothing good has happened. The same platitudes have been trotted out for the 78th time. But maybe this time…!

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

The words of a politician are not accomplishments.

If it ever gets descheduled, it’ll be an accomplishment. I’m not going to treat announcements as accomplishments.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Public discourse from a sitting executive politician represents progress. It is not enough yet, but it is progress. In years past such statements would have been massively disruptive, and via speech like this the topic is being normalized.

It’s not enough yet. We arenf done

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Biden could order cannabis descheduled ( what his campaign program was) and if agencies don’t listen, fucking fire the agency heads and hire someone that will. It literally one of the handful of things he could do himself.

But somehow it’s 3.5 years into his first term. And Biden has apparently compromised even more with himself and we won’t get his original compromise of descheduling.

When a president acts like this right before their next election, lots of voters rationally stop believing any of their current campaign promises.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

What do you mean? This is standard political fare… most of the population has the memory of a goldfish, so popular shit like this always waits until the election cycle.

Additionally, an executive order, or changing the chief of the DEA, are probably the least effective ways to handle it. All it would take is a republican administration to undo it all. The way that sticks best is legislation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Your boat is leaking.

Do you either bail out the water, or try to get into port so you can fix it.

Or maybe, you do both. Biden can reschedule…. Today. He could have done it 3.5 years ago.

He hasn’t. He probably won’t.

You’re right that legislation is a more permanent fix. No question there. Doesn’t mean you don’t work the other, faster, solution to get something good enough for the time being done.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

most of the population has the memory of a goldfish, so popular shit like this always waits until the election cycle.

Stupid uninformed people…

Most of them vote R or not at all.

But neoliberals refuse to acknowledge people who aren’t ignorant and do care.

“Because what are ya gonna do, vote Republican?”

It doesn’t work.

Maybe we try helping people? Worst case scenario, Dems actually help people when they’re in office.

Isn’t that the whole point of electing Dems? Isn’t that better than just stalling the Republicans destruction of our country?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Source for where Biden called for it to be descheduled?

I can’t find it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

He attempted to forgive student debt (which was in his right to do so as head of the executive branch) and got swatted down by the corrupt Supreme Court. What do you think will happen if he rescheduled marijuana?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

He waited 2 years till he lost the house, made a half assed attempt he knew would fail, then said:

See? Trying is just a waste of time, we should never try

And voters remember that when it’s two years later and he tries to tell them elections are important and if Trump wins suddenly the president is all powerful.

Neoliberals do the same shit as republicans. They need their voters to believe that when the other team is president, the president is all powerful. But when their own team is in power, the president can’t do shit, so it’s not their fault campaign promises aren’t kept.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The student loan forgiveness was swatted down because he technically didn’t really have the authority to do so, Congress typically holds the power of the purse. Rescheduling isn’t at risk of violating the separation of power as the DEA is under the purview of the executive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Yeah I agree, they’d be better not even bringing it up instead of walking around campaigning on something they should have done years ago.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I think this was always back-pocketed for right before the election if he thought it’d help push him over the edge.

It might be a smart political move to do it right before the election so it’s fresh on all of our goldfish brains.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

It’s honestly just insulting at this point. Deschedule the fucking plant already, you doddering old fools.

When you’re done, we can have a frank conversation about the number of people directly killed by alcohol each year. (It’s literally infinitely more compared to marijuana.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Man I think you have way too high of expectations for the actual powers of a vice presidency.

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points

You can tell there’s an election coming up.

permalink
report
reply
9 points

On today’s episode of “don’t bite the hand that feeds” we reclassify marijuana.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 15K

    Posts

  • 428K

    Comments