The Mexican Senate approved a measure Tuesday that would eliminate penalties for possession of several drugs, including marijuana. Proposed by conservative President Felipe Calderon, the bill would legalize possession of up to five grams of pot, half a gram of cocaine, and traces of harder drugs such as meth and heroin. The bill also would eliminate mandatory federal sentencing for small-scale dealers.

Following a nationwide debate on the efficacy of President Calderon’s escalation of violence against local drug cartels, several regional leaders have publicly supported a national policy of decriminalization. Former Presidents Ernesto Zadillo (Mexico), Fernando Cardozo (Brazil), and Cesar Gaviria (Columbia) all endorsed a return to progressive drug politics in the wake of a staggering rise in drug-related violence.

Succumbing to public pressure, Calderon proposed the legislation with the hopes of relieving some of the burden on local law enforcement, and allowing a more focused pursuit of high level drug traffickers. The bill awaits the endorsement of the Mexican lower house before it can be passed into law.

On Monday, Connecticut Governor M. Jodi Rell, said she opposes the decriminalization of marijuana. With a bill regarding that issue already headed to the General Assembly, two of Rell’s spokesmen stopped short of using the word “veto,” but they both said that Rell opposes the concept.

Spokesman Rich Harris said:

The governor opposes illegal drug use and possession. Whether it’s a little or a lot, marijuana is an illegal drug.

This is where our way of doing things in this country makes absolutely no sense. If the constituents want marijuana decriminalized and it makes it way into the General Assembly and it passes, how can one person, who has obvious biased feelings towards the issue, have the power to veto it? We elect the politicians to represent us yet we also elect a politician that presides over them and can reverse any decisions that they made for us in the first place. As Spock would say, “That’s not logical.”

Even though Rell is a cancer survivor, she vetoed a bill in June of 2007 that wanted to legalize medical marijuana. The state House of Representatives voted 89-58 while the Senate voted 23-13, both shy of the two-thirds margin that was needed in both chambers to override the veto. Her reasoning of the decision was that although she had sympathy for those who wanted to use marijuana for pain management, she said that her sympathy could not overcome her concerns that those seeking to obtain the drug would need to break the law to purchase it.

Well, there’s a good way to avoid people breaking the law. Change the law! Her statement does not even make sense. If medical marijuana was legalized then those people wouldn’t be breaking the law to purchase their weed. Is she implying that people would pretend to be in pain or sick to qualify for medical marijuana? Shouldn’t that be left up to the physicians? What right does a politician have on who qualifies? All the states have to do is legalize medical marijuana and then let the doctors decide from there.

It will be interesting to see how this issue pans out. If Rell successfully vetoes again, then Connecticut might just become the black sheep of the New England family. If they manage to override this veto then the law would reduce the penalty for possession of less than one ounce of marijuana from the current level of a misdemeanor to an infraction with a maximum fine of $121.

Hot on the heels of Massachusetts introducing a bill into legislature to decriminalize marijuana, Connecticut cooks up one of their own. Led by Senate Majority Leader Martin M. Looney, D-New Haven, the bill would decriminalize possession of up to an ounce of marijuana, making it punishable by a small fine, save the state an estimated $11 million a year in police, court and incarceration costs and produce about $320,000 in revenue from the fines.

If approved by the General Assembly and signed into law by Gov. M. Jodi Rell — who last year vetoed legislation to allow medical uses of marijuana — Connecticut would join a dozen other states with reduced penalties for marijuana kept for personal use. Chief State’s Attorney Kevin Kane contested that even Looney’s definition of a “small” amount of marijuana is flawed, because an ounce — about 28 grams — is a hefty weight among cannabis users that commands prices in the hundreds of dollars.

Rep. Arthur O’Neill, R-Southbury, ranking member of the committee, said that it appears the state’s laws for simple possession are tantamount to decriminalizing it.

O’Neill said:

It seems like we’re only codifying current practice, which is almost no one goes to jail for marijuana.

Sen. John A. Kissel, R-Enfield, ranking committee member, asked:

If we decriminalize marijuana, would that not have the effect of encouraging drug dealers?

Looney responded:

I don’t think it would necessarily alter consumption patterns. People are either going to use the substance or not, based upon other factors in their lives, but I think what it would really do, as the people in Massachusetts were persuaded, is it will save the casual user from having a criminal record that will follow him throughout his whole life for something that is I think a very minor offense that is more properly treated as an infraction rather than a criminal violation.

James Meickle, a member of Central Connecticut State University’s chapter of Students for Sensible Drug Policy, said prescription drugs are being easily diverted for recreational use that have much more potential for health damage than marijuana. It’s about time someone said that. The Pharmaceutical industry has just been pumping out the pills, turning this country into a pill popping nation. These drugs that are manufactured have more noted side affects than what marijuana does. In order to take the pills, you might have to try other pills to alleviate the symptoms caused by the first set of pills. Seems to work out for the Pharmaceutical industry. Never mind that teenagers and adults alike are abusing them for a high, eating them like candy or indulge a little bit in that “hillbilly cocaine”.

Rep. Michael P. Lawlor, D-East Haven, who teaches at the University of New Haven, said that while students are fairly routine victims of mixing pills and alcohol and end up in emergency rooms, marijuana users don’t end up hospitalized. Another great point. Mixing pills and alcohol definitely leads to trouble in form of accidents if the users are behind the wheel. Alcohol impairs the ability to drive, while the pills intensify the affect of the alcohol. I would say a good portion of the marijuana smokers drive while under the influence of marijuana and I bet their driving record would be no different than someone that doesn’t smoke weed.

They should do a study on that. In fact they should see just what people can do under the influence of marijuana, just to show people that for some people it’s a way of life or at least a way to look at life. You’d be surprised that there is at least six degrees of separation from you and a marijuana user.

Following its sister states Massachusetts and Connecticut in the New England family, Rhode Island is introducing a bill that would decriminalize possession of less than an ounce of marijuana, making it a civil violation punishable by fine rather than jail time.

The bill sponsored by Sen. Leo R. Blais, R-Coventry, would not make possession of an ounce or less of marijuana legal, but it would reduce penalty for such possession from up to a year of jail time to a civil violation with a maximum $100 fine and forfeiture of the marijuana. The laws concerning possession with intent to sell would not be changed.  I guess this idea is better than the alternative where people get whisked away to jail. Still, losing your marijuana and having to pay a fine for it… harsh. That’s like paying for the bag of weed all over again and getting nothing out of it. What, do they hope that people will just give up smoking after being busted a few times? That just might work because people won’t be able to afford to pay the fines and then get another bag of weed, thanks to this wonderful economy.

This idea just won’t work or solve anything because the drug traffickers will still be putting their product into the streets. Going after the user is never the answer. Do they think that if they bust the user then the drug traffickers business will drop? No, ten more people will be right there willing to take their place. In fact, they’ll probably only catch 1 out of 10 people that possess pot. This approach doesn’t work for prostitution and it won’t work for marijuana.

The only way to stop the drug traffickers is to legalize it. If they legalize marijuana then the users would go to commercial retailers or grow their own. The drug traffickers would be out of business, having to go legit or be forced to drop out of the game. The violence associated with some drug traffickers would diminish and money would be made that would be going toward the state. If you’re fair about it, people will pay… if you’re greedy, then they will just take some space in their basement and start an indoor crop of their own and keep it on the black market.

Blais said he thought his bill had a 60-percent chance of passing this session. He attributed the lack of vocal opposition to last year’s passage of the medical marijuana law, saying it showed support for easing the penalties concerning a small amount of the drug.

Blais said:

We approved medical marijuana. That horse is already out of the barn and in the next field.

Yeehaw… let’s get the show on the road. It’s going to be like a game of Russian Roulette, people feeling more confident to possess weed when they know they’ll get a fine, instead of going to jail. It’s not the cure, but it’s a step in the right direction. Wow, think about how the show Cops will be, with all these states wanting to decriminalize marijuana.

Citing the utter failure of any kind of war on drugs, several world leaders have urged President Obama to consider further reducing the penalty for marijuana use.

Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Ernesto Zedillo of Mexico, and Cesar Gaviria of Colombia, all made the same recommendation – coincidentally these men reside in three of the world’s four leading weed exporters.

It’s time to recognize the failure, the article states. And, if we’re doing it abroad, we might as well do it at home too.

Marijuana activists in Minnesota are leading a renewed push at legalization for MMJ. They are hoping a shift in strategy, emphasizing compassion, will garner enough votes that Gov. Pawlenty will think twice before blocking it, as he did with previous MMJ legislation.

Also on the legalization front, lawmakers in Seattle are considering again downgrading marijuana as a legal priority. Already not considered high on the list, no pun intended, a new piece of legislation will make it a $100 fine for being caught in possession.

Okay I guess if you’re used to being thrown in jail over it, a $100 ticket should be a Godsend, but I think we can do better Seattle. Why do we need to punish these people at all, they’re not hurting anyone?

Connecticut (and its lucky inhabitants) may one day be joining the “cool kids club,” as the state moves closer to the passage of a marijuana decriminalization and medical marijuana bill.

Shortly after nearby Massachusetts adopted decriminalization, CT legislators are passing a bill to implement medical marijuana standards and decriminalize possession. The MA bill has been at the center of a very mixed response, law enforcement is extremely negative about the issue while the public seems to be getting along just fine.

The state’s leading medical associations, like the nurse’s union, have come out in favor of the legislation, which would make Connecticut the 14th state to have medical marijuana.

Here’s the drafted text for the bill to decriminalize pot, and here’s the one for medical marijuana.

The stated purpose for the decriminalization bill says it’s aimed at creating a “more sensible marijuana policy.” Imagine if we could get that from the federal government too? Either way, I like this trend that the Northeast is showing.

As Massachusetts adjusts to recent legislation that made the penalties for possessing marijuana a $100 fine, the law hasn’t generated very much revenue for one town. Actually in Hingham, Mass., it hasn’t netted much of anything.

Sunday, The Hingham Journal interviewed Town Clerk Eileen McCracken, who is responsible for collecting the fines. He claimed so far there have been only four citations on the books for a town with an estimated population of 20,000 residents.

I can’t help but wonder if the law’s failure, or success depending on how you feel about marijuana decriminalization, is the result of a self-fulfilling prophecy by local law enforcement leaders. The Mass. Chiefs of Police Association recently spoke out against the law, calling it “unenforceable” due to practical limitations and vague wording in the legislation.

Frustrated by the recent passage of a law decriminalizing marijuana, Worcestor officials want to do something about it at the local level. The city council is trying to create a civil penalty or criminal indictment if someone is caught using marijuana.

The move is in response to a November initiative on the state’s ballot that decriminalized possession of marijuana, with a penalty of $100 if you are caught in public with it. Law enforcement have ridiculed the law on the grounds that there is no practical way to enforce the law.

We all knew that the first major area to decriminalize pot would have multiple challenges to the law itself. Let’s see how local government’s attempt to circumvent the people’s will turns out…

President-elect Barack Obama has repeated several times he is not for legalization, he is for de-criminalization.

Obama continually refers to “changing paradigms” with how we police drugs, referring to the drug war as “an utter failure.” Unfortunately, how much of it is partisan rhetoric, how much he wants to change, and how much he can change are all still in the speculation stages.

What is known is that the economy is by and large an overwhelming concern. And if you look at the popular support afforded presidents who have turned around the economy, they usually enjoy political dominance in a second term – which is when many predict, if ever, we’ll see legitimate action on drug policy legislation by Obama and his administration.

Just because marijuana has been decriminalized by the Nov. 4 election, does not mean people should light up in the streets of Boston just yet.

The new law was recently approved by the Governor’s Council in its certification of November’s results. However due to a 1972 state supreme court ruling, all laws take effect 30 days from certification, not the ballot.

The delay will also help law enforcement figure out how to address and police the new law.
Timothy Cruz, Plymouth County District Attorney, said an important distinction should also be made with the new legislation — it does not legalize marijuana — but decriminalizes it.

There are two significant differences. The first is that legalization currently only applies to medicinal users and under decriminalization everyone is treated the same. In Massachusetts, that means a $100 fine for less than an ounce. The second big difference being legalization allows for a legal supply (although the statutory efficacy of legalization in that respect is a work in progress).

As Cruz points out in the article:

Decriminalization is not legalization. Where are people going to get their marijuana? Not Tedeschi’s, they’re going to a drug dealer.

Cruz also said street dealers will probably have to adapt to the new legislation as well. He said the $100 fee is likely to be passed down to consumers as “a cost of doing business.” The article reports that ounces of marijuana are selling for as much as $600.