It is often said that continuing to do the same thing over and over without success is a definition. For at least 40 years activists have tried to petition for the widespread approval of marijuana use with too little success for the effort involved. Here is a plan to change the overall approach and only you can make it better.
Here is the plan and the rationalization for the plan will follow the initial outline. The concept is derived from studying the last two elections and especially the way the conversations have gone on this site.
The next push in marijuana decriminalization and/or legalization should include, if not be primarily directed at, people over the age of 55. Yep, to all those citizens who can get senior discounts. They are the ones who have repeatedly voted to keep the various initiatives from passing. Legalize marijuana use for this group, prove that most of the anti propaganda are flat-out lies and move the goal post much closer for everyone.
Did you ever see the teabagger crowd? If there ever was a group that needed to take a toke or two and relax that would be them. Their imaginations have convinced them that life sucks, that things might get so bad that they would have to live in the future in the manner that they already believe minorities, drug users, etc. do. Their unemployment, lessened security net, etc., have made them excessively agitated and suggestible. And they vote. They have been voting against marijuana initiatives since the early 70's and will continue to do so until they realize they have been totally misled.
It is not that the pro marijuana groups and lobbies have not done their best. It just needs more and without new ideas we make it more difficult to go forward. Look at copies of petitions from the early 70's and we are still doing the same thing.
Starting off, there must be a name. Started with Gerontological Marijuana, then wondered if Geriatric Marijuana would be better. With either name the GM abbreviation might be powerful. Then started thinking that since the target group was the age of grandparents, maybe GrandPot would work. And then to throw in for the local news, the network and entertainment shows came up with a name they could use, Seniormilla. Yeah, they could laugh their way through that one. There are already plenty of seniors who could, would, be willing to tell the truth to their local news media, write the letters, solicit names for petitions. And if you can come up with a better name please put it in your comments.
First and foremost we have lost the whole branding effort of marijuana reform. While there have been a few exceptions, the opponents (with our help) have managed to brand all marijuana use as if it was all binge herb smoking. And we have revelled in being stoned, zonked, wasted, and worse. When someone who does not have familiarity with marijuana use looks at how we have portrayed the experience with the words we have used, they darn well might get the wrong impresssion. What if users referred to getting happy, getting better, getting relaxed, feeling well?
Even those who tried marijuana in their past now have been led to believe that today's pot is much more potent than back in the day. After all it sure costs a lot more so it must be true, right? First off, if you got really good pot in the 70's it was as good as most of today's best. It is just a comparison of unequal parts like when tv news tries to equate right-wing lunancy with left-wing activism. Some similarities, but a big difference in amplitude.
And the cost increase? Law enforcement has traditionally exaggerted cost and quantity in many if not most drug cases. And of course dealers and growers and some dispenseries have loved the high prices compared to the 70's. And the main reason is that the cops and federal law enforcement would misrepresent the value of all the seizures. When the law started testifying in court and on tv that the value of each seized plant was several thousand dollars, then it became much easier to charge $300-400 an ounce or more.
And the lying did not stop there. All the reefer madness sort of bs has been added, repeated and repeated some more. The lies about this plant and the way humans interact with it have been distorted as much as the lies to get the United States into the war in Iraq. Weapons of mass destruction. Iraq responsible for 9-11. Big lies to convince Americans to do things that the truth would never convince them to do.
And then there was Cheech and Chong, bless them. And all the other movies and tv portrayals. They were comedians, actors. And yet our government wanted to use their Hollywood portrayals as if they were accurate representations of marijuana use. Getting high was much more useful than getting stoned. But we let them define getting high in the most unuseful ways possible.
So before you quit reading here is the plan in a nutshell (whatever that means):
Let's start now for 2012 and 2014 elections to put on the ballot initiatives to legalize marijuana use for all Americans(or all Tennesseans, or whatever state you are in) over the age of 55. Yes, this would be a gateway law, instead of an alleged gateway drug.
Importantly, this eliminates the "What about the children?" argument.
Secondly, age requirements are well recognized in all states as laws point to a time at which some previously prohibited right is finally granted. Think driving, drinking and voting. Or receiving Social Security.
Third, all of us allegedly selfish baby boomers could finally vote affirmatively without seeming self serving as after all most folks will in fact reach this ripe old age. I'm no Nate Silver but my best guess is that amendments allowing people 55 and over would have a better chance of being passed than an amendment for overall legalization or decriminalization. Further, passage of a 55 and over law should make it easier for overall passage to occur sooner than trying to pass overall decrim first.
Fourth, legalization or decriminalization is normally seen as a youth thing so it has been relatively easy to frame it in a way that "means" older people should be against. I believe that this proposal makes it easier for the young and the older and everyone else to vote in favor. Even if the kids only want to see their grandparents get happy. And if framed correctly Seniormilla is much less likely to have natural opponents. Remember, most decent polls have found that there is always at least a low 40% range of approval, sometimes a majority approval, so the bar does not have to be moved very far for the overall approval to be above 50% everywhere. Changing five percent from no to yes brings the toughest states very close to -- if not over -- the threshold, and five percent in the states where it is 50/50, more or less, means absolute approval at the polls.
And fifth and last, just imagine we changed the verbiage of marijuana use so that instead of a friend asking you if you wanted to get stoned, they asked if you wanted to get happy? The nutcases of the world have already freaked over the use of Gay as a descriptor. Imagine if they now had to face "Happy" or "Happier" as the name for marijuana use.
And the final point is this. Kos is supposed to be a site dedicated to the election of Democrats. Do you believe that the inclusion of such a proposal in your state would increase the overall election turnout? Do you believe that overall increase in turnout usually means more Democrats getting elected? Do you believe that if a Republican offered such a plan in your state that voters would come out? What if Sarah Palin talked openly about her knowledge of marijuana, do you think her supporters and others who normally would not vote for her or any of her ideas would support her and vote for her and her party?
What if any smart Republican chose this path? Would this create an overall movement towards the Republican Tea Party that would support them in the future?
The time is now. The Presidential election is just less than two years away. If you understand how this could help advance the cause of marijuana freedom and the Democratic Party then please take this idea to your state, your town and begin now to really make a change. Yes, you can. To paraphrase Nancy Reagan, just say yes.
The government will not go ahead and do the research because it will just point out that the government was wrong in the past. So we aren't going to get help there. However, having states with much larger populations being able to use marijuana will in fact show that crime does not go up, that more kids do not end up using, etc.
Friends, your mission, should you choose to accept it is to begin now. Start writing letters to the editor. Talk to your relatives, friends and even strangers about the idea of legalizing marijuana for those over the age of 55. Draft a straight forward petition to allow seniors to legally use marijuana. Don't worry about taxes or any other additions. Opponents will use the additions to create imaginary,scary objections. They will anyway, even if there are no additions, but then we get to ask them, "What have you been smoking?"
Get the ball rolling. Let them tell you that you might as well legalize it for everyone if you do that. But bring them back to the idea of would you vote to legalize this group to use this plant. Make the first step clear and unambiguous and the next will be much easier.