
In less than 70 days the residents of the District of Columbia will vote to legalize possession of small amounts of marijuana. This soon-to-be watershed event has many implications on a national, regional and federal playing field. Does anyone know it yet?
Although D.C. is a city-state with its own mayor and City Council, it is effectively ruled by Congress. D.C. is a federal city, and when Congress and its favored party-du-jour wants to put its foot down, it will. When a ballot passed for MJ in 1998, Congress simply blocked funding and the issue died.
63% of D.C. residents in a recent WaPo poll support legal weed. In a city that is 51% African American (vs. a 10% overall population in the U.S.,) with an immensely high incarceration rate for small drug offenses, that poll result is not surprising. What may be surprising, perhaps, is that Congress may not want to have a dog in this fight. The GOPers can point to their own leading city of the free world "going down the drain like the rest of the country with this whole 'legal pot thing,'" and use it as a tool in their own re-election campaigns. They may want to sit aside and see which way the wind is blowing from a federal level, too. Or they can take the Rand Paul approach and say that state's rights trump federal regulation, and free enterprise shouldn't be stepped on, especially if a constituency has voted in favor of it. (After all, as so many staffers on both sides of the aisle smoke-up, that may be a good thing. I have a feeling some Red-Staters hit it, too.)
Ironically, Andy Harris, a GOP Representative from Maryland, one of the states with fairly liberal MJ laws overall (possession of less than 10g–max $500 fine, misdemeanor) has championed the cause in Congress to push the house budget bill to pass last month that included a provision to block not only a legalization effort, but also a decriminalization bill passed by the D.C. Council this year that is in effect. Interesting.
But stepping into an election and the will of the people on such a popular, yet polarizing cause can have repercussions. Sides are already being drawn up in the D.C. mayoral race, with Democratic challengers and Independents taking the side of "legalize," and "legalize, but educate." At the local level, the GOP isn't in the dance. They haven't won a local mayoral election or controlled City Council since … well … before I moved next door (Arlington, Va.). in 1987, when the Redskins were still good, and could be called the Redskins without wincing.
And then there's the White House and federal law. A reminder people: Under federal law, MJ is still illegal. And how ironic would it be for the resident at 1600 Pennsylvania to go to Ben's Chili Bowl for lunch and be brought face-to-face with dispensaries operating openly under legal D.C. law? But as far as federal law is concerned … hot-seat for one in the back corner, please.
Ladies and Gents: May I introduce you to Flash Point D.C. Please, no autographs.
So will the ballot pass? Yes. If it passes, will legal sales in D.C. not be far behind? Yes. It will be quick. Will the GOP-led House sit this one out and let D.C. do it's thing? Maybe to rub it in the face of President Obama ("he let his own city fall apart.") Or will they once again stomp on the will of the denizens of "The District," as the locals call it, and play that game they play?
Prediction: Ballot passes for a touchdown. Congress blocks the extra point.
There's more to the battle though. In Mike DeBonis' superb article about the legalization effort in WaPo, he quoted a source as calling the D.C. legalization vote the "Anti-Legalization Waterloo" - if it passes in D.C., the house of cards (pun intended) will slowly fall. But one thing to remember, come October, these MJ issues are going to absolutely slam the airwaves and be an unavoidable subject.
Certainly will be a fun and interesting thing to watch as a spectator. And who knows, maybe in a year or so on my way to a Caps or Nats game, I'll see first-person see just how far the country has come. Or not.