Feinstein backs effort to defeat marijuana legalization

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California’s senior senator, has lent her support to the campaign to defeat Proposition 19, the marijuana legalization measure on the state’s November ballot.

The prominent Democrat, first elected to the Senate in 1992, signed the ballot argument against the initiative. On Monday, she issued a statement through the opposition campaign calling the measure “a jumbled legal nightmare that will make our highways, our workplaces and our communities less safe.”

Roger Salazar, spokesman for Public Safety First, said the opposition committee sought Feinstein’s support.

“She’s one of the most respected figures in California,” he said. “She has a great history with law enforcement and dealing with this type of issue. We’re looking at a bipartisan effort.”

Proposition 19 would allow adults 21 and older to possess, grow and transport marijuana, and would allow cities and counties to regulate and tax commercial sales. Most of the state’s top elected officials and candidates for statewide office — from both major parties — are against the initiative.

Dale Sky Clare, a spokesman for Tax Cannabis 2010, the committee behind the measure, said it was not surprising that Feinstein and other statewide politicians opposed it.

“I’m just not putting a lot of faith in politicians to lead,” she said. “The voters have always led on this issue.”

-- John Hoeffel

Comments

[Tab Cocovillea]

She's on the wrong side of this issue, but being a promoter of big government I shouldn't be surprised.

[Mark]

A total puff piece.

[Justice Scalia]

Feinstein comes down on my side of an issue???

Who'd a thunk it?

[Kyle]

Time to vote this hag out! She is too conservative to be painted a liberal

[Jerry]

Good point Ken, Taxing booze brought us out of the Great Depression, Indian casinos gave them a way to support themselves while paying millions of dollars in taxes to the fedral government. You may want to leave out positive facts out of your sarcastic nonsence. Just saying

[Charles]

I have always voted for Dianne Feinstein.... until now.

[Shawn]

Hey Mario Estrada, you think they might be for it (legalization) because they have children who are in jail for pot? Not just because they are profiteers or users.

It is past time for this dinosaur to go.

[William]

The voters in California need to vote Feinstein out of office

[Adam]

I am a Democratic voter, fairly centrist-to-liberal. I've voted for her in every election-This will be the first time I vote against her. I guess I'll vote Green, which I have never done. She is siding with the fear merchants.

[Ty]

So this means the Prison Industrial Complex donated to her campaign, that's all.

[JOE]

Her whole statement shows how out of touch with reality she is.

Anyone can get weed just by asking who,s got it it,s just that dam simple
& IT,S BEEN THAT WAY SINCE THE 1960,S

It would solve alot of budget problems !!

AND ALCOHOL & CIGARETTES ARE SO MUCH WORSE AND THERE ISNT ANY SCREAMING TA JESUS ABOUT THAT NOW IS THERE ?

THE REAL DEAL IS THIS CIGARETTES CAUSE CANCER THERE,S OVER 300 DIFFERENT POISONS & TOXINS IN EACH ONE.

AND THAT FUELS THE MEDICAL INDUSTRY TAKING CARE OF EM ALL .

ALCOHOL KILLS PEOPLE ALL THE TIME FROM THE LIVER TO THE DUI.
AND THAT FUELS THE LEGAL SYSTEM.

OUR COUNTRY'S CORRUPT AS HECK & EVERYBODY & THERE GRANDMOTHER KNOWS IT. ~ YEAH I SAID IT !! YOU BIG SECRET KEEPERS YOU.

MARIJUANA HASNT KILLED ANYONE. !

AND IS BEING TALKED ABOUT BY VERY VERY VERY OLD PEOPLE LIKE THEY KNOW WHATS GOING ON..... AND THEY DONT !

BUT THEY KNOW WHAT INDUSTRIES FILL THERE DONATION BOXES AT ELECTION TIME.

[Isa France]

Superior Judge Jim Gray talks about the 6 groups that benefit from prohibition. It's no surprise Senator Feinstein is in one of those groups, my friends and I will be voting YES on Prop 19. Polls show that 56% favor the bill but we need to keep working and educating 1 person at a time.

http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php?name=Web_Links&l_op=visit&lid=217

[MJ]

count on politicians to be against solutions that actually make sense and WORK....I would like to know who her largest corporate campaign contributors are....

[Jennifer Williams]

Oops, there goes my vote.

[mrmitch]

I only hope that she never gets cancer and needs the drug. I think that the only way to improve our lot in life and stop this insane use of the term "drug way" is to legalize marijuana and quit acting like this is a bad drug. It has many benefits and those benefits should be available to all who need them without breaking the law. You can see how the state officials react to medical marijuana, no give and take on this subject.
Yes on 19 for California, it's the right thing to do today.

[Cal Godot]

The Senator profits, personally and politically, from the drug war, so Feinstein would not favor legalization. The pharmaceutical companies who own her also oppose legalization. The real news would be if Feinstein were willing to give up that golden source of income in order to represent the clear will of the people. Same goes for Cooley, who must have friends who are drug dealers, since Cooley's actions alone have created a whole new market for drug dealers.

Think about it: a clinic sets up. By law it has to maintain a list of its customers: addresses and phone numbers. Then the city cracks down. The clinic closes rather than face an arrest. (More clinics are closing voluntarily than the city anticipated.) Then the police notice a rise in "delivery services."

Since this has been going on for decades, either the police know this connection and endorse it, or they are more ignorant of the street than the average marijuana user.

Active law enforcement, who are profiting personally, professionally and politically from illegal drugs, simply cannot be trusted on this issue. It's like asking a thief to install your security system. "Foxes in the hen house" would be the appropriate age-old adage.

Legalization advocates should prepare yourselves for intense battle: this was the proverbial shot fried across the bow. This is where it begins - the opposition, who control the cops and the courts, is only going to up the ante from here. Widespread raids (of homes, clinics, and grow warehouses), user busts, and a massive effort toward schools are on the agenda. Asset seizures and property forfeitures will accompany this - remember, they don't need a conviction (and not even an arrest) to seize drugs, drug money, or anything suspected of being used in an illegal drug operation. (Ever wonder why the cops seize widescreen TVs when they raid clinics?)

This is going to be war, folks. The authorities will have to give up BILLIONS in personal and professional income if legalization passes. The billions raised in taxes will benefit the entire state; Feinstein and her ilk will lose significant political contributions, which will limit their personal income. They will lose a 'scare issue' and the votes that go with it. The anti-legalization forces have everything to lose - and nothing to gain - from legalization of marijuana. You can expect intense violence from government and its police forces before they will surrender that amount of revenue.

[Tierramama]

I am another voter who thinks I will be voting for someone else. Prohibition is bad.

[DanR]

If Big Business were behind it, she would be too. I'll never forgive her for promoting the Manhattanization of San Francisco when she was mayor.

[Ryan]

Look guys...all facts point to legalization being beneficial to society. Let's make this happen already. Jeez. -_-

[Bart wakker]

Regarding the drawback of increased use:

I doubt it. In the Netherlands anyone can buy weed in a 'coffeeshop' legally, up to 5 gram (about a fifth of an ounce). Almost every village has one or more outlets. Yet usage in the Netherlands is about the average in Europe, I.e. About half of tha in the UK or the US!

Even if you got increased use: most likely it would partially replace other recreational drugs such as tobacco, alcohol or hard drugs. The net effect would thus be positive. In addition, after cannabis would be a normal, socially accepted drug just like alcohol, people would be raises and educated re. it's use. Current excesses and problems are not caused by the substance itself, but rather because the underground setting it tends to be used in. For sure, if alcohol were prohibited, there would be less total consumption but more extreme and problematic cases.

More consumption isn't necessarily a bad thing; what matters, as with any substance including food, is how responsibly people learn to deal with it.

[Scot K]

I'd like to see a televised debate on the issue, with real time fact checking.

[anon]

This is not 1950, Senator.

[REA]

You're either for or against Prop 19.
There's no middle ground.
I'm for.
'Nuff said. End of discussion.

[Uber]

Ken is on it. The Lottery was suppose to fix the school problem. It help to fund pensions and gave high paying jobs to the Lottery workers. Makes ya wonder why there is no money for schools.

[Dan Horstman]

Lickily Feinstein is a national politician and doesn't have anything to do with the internal politics of California. So while I would prefer her to support the measure...it really doesn't matter that she opposes it.