Which is why there was deafening silence on the issue this year from the Democrats.Obama has won the vote in Colorado by 50% to 47%. Colorado is a swing state.
I'd be inclined to put money on this predictionWhich is why there was deafening silence on the issue this year from the Democrats.
They didnt want to upset liberals (who tend to support legalisation) in such an important swing state during an election year.
Now the election is dusted, theyll stomp all over this.
Im no expert on US Constitutional Law, but It appears as if they'll use the 'Commerce power' of the Constitution to 'regulate' (i.e. quash) the practice.I'd be inclined to put money on this prediction
https://news.vice.com/article/leading-anti-marijuana-academics-are-paid-by-painkiller-drug-companies?utm_source=vicenewsfbLeading Anti-Marijuana Academics Are Paid By Painkiller Drug Companies
As Americans continue to embrace pot—as medicine and for recreational use—opponents are turning to a set of academic researchers to claim that policymakers should avoid relaxing restrictions around marijuana. It's too dangerous, risky, and untested, they say. Just as drug company-funded research has become incredibly controversial in recent years, forcing major medical schools and journals to institute strict disclosure requirements, could there be a conflict of interest issue in the pot debate?
VICE has found that many of the researchers who have advocated against legalizing pot have also been on the payroll of leading pharmaceutical firms with products that could be easily replaced by using marijuana. When these individuals have been quoted in the media, their drug-industry ties have not been revealed.
No surprise there