The Phoenix Network:
 
 
About  |  Advertise
Adult  |  Moonsigns  |  Band Guide  |  Blogs  |  In Pictures
 

Blunt object

The political fight over a November marijuana-reform ballot question has sparked a Battle of the Bong
By CHRIS FARAONE  |  September 25, 2008

080928_pot_main
These days, Howie Carr is not the only smug bully stereotyping pot smokers as dangerously naive dingbats. With Election Day’s Question 2 ballot initiative threatening to reduce the penalty for less than one ounce of weed to a mere civil slap and $100 fine, Cape and Islands District Attorney Michael O’Keefe is leading a coalition of the Commonwealth’s heaviest hitters — including the other 10 Massachusetts district attorneys, Governor Deval Patrick, Mayor Tom Menino, and Attorney General Martha Coakley — to stand united against marijuana reform. But, as the state’s fiercest civic power brokers are quickly finding out, the war over Question 2 is not your typical suits vs. stoners scrum.

Firstly, operatives with the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy (CSMP) are hardly Spicoli-styled dimwits. Together, they gathered signatures from more than 125,000 constituents representing all but one Massachusetts municipality (Mount Washington in the Berkshires) to actually get Question 2 on the November ballot. They’ve also raised nearly $650,000 since 2007, which is a major bummer for Question 2 opponents, who have stashed fewer than $28,000, and who resent CSMP’s feasting on out-of-state contributions, such as the $400,000 the committee received from billionaire Wall Street–tycoon-turned-liberal-activist George Soros.

The CSMP accuses O’Keefe’s organization (dubbed the Coalition for Safe Streets) of more than just openly opposing statistical evidence, scientific research, and the will of Massachusetts residents. In a press conference held outside the Edward W. Brooke Courthouse this past Thursday morning, CSMP Campaign Manager Whitney Taylor claimed the district attorneys committed “at least 15 violations of Massachusetts campaign-finance and election laws.” Among the alleged infractions: the Coalition for Safe Streets began accepting contributions and spending funds before it registered with the Office of Campaign and Political Finance (OCPF), and the Massachusetts District Attorneys Association (MDAA) published lies about the CSMP initiative on its Web site.

“Their opposition statement against Question 2 promoted false statements about what the question would do if passed,” says Taylor, who stressed that CSMP is not a libertarian group looking to get high, but is instead seeking to minimize consequences for small-time offenders who are often denied access to student loans, housing, and employment due to Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) reports that are filed upon arrest. Currently, even first-time pot offenders are placed on probation.

Although the OCPF press liaison will neither confirm nor deny that it received the CSMP complaint, and therefore cannot comment on whether O’Keefe’s coalition is indeed in violation, evidence gleaned from public documents sure makes it look that way. The Coalition for Safe Streets accepted its first contribution — $2,272.73 from a committee formed by Essex County District Attorney Jonathan Blodgett — on July 18, 2008; its first expenditure — $21,000 to the Boston-based consulting firm O’Neill and Associates — came on August 21, 2008. OCPF records also confirm that the coalition neglected to file a statement of organization until September 5, 2008. Prior to that date, the coalition did exist as a Political Action Committee (PAC), but not as a designated ballot-question committee, which is required for this sort of effort.

A statement released by the coalition counters: “The actions of the District Attorneys and the Coalition for Safe Streets have been vetted and approved by the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance. This is a desperate attempt by out-of-state pro-drug interests to intimidate those who oppose their efforts to eliminate drug laws in Massachusetts.”

1  |  2  |   next >
Related: Freedom watch: Jailhouse bloc, Drugs and culture, Pot Edward Island, More more >
  Topics: News Features , Deval Patrick, Election Campaigns, Edward Brooke,  More more >
  • Share:
  • Share this entry with Facebook
  • Share this entry with Digg
  • Share this entry with Delicious
  • RSS feed
  • Email this article to a friend
  • Print this article
Comments
Re: Blunt object
I think it should be pointed out that the so called Sensible pot people were able to gather the signatures to get this on the ballot by hiring an organization to do it for them. Soros paid - he funded mostly the whole thing at over $400K!  This is NOT a grassroots thing.
By potdoesharmothers on 09/25/2008 at 7:20:44
Re: Blunt object
Opponents are revealing a lot by relying on hyperbole and outright lies to make their case against marijuana. I wonder if they realize the harm they do to children. Based on everything I've learned in life, when you treat kids like you expect them to do something, they are more likely to do it. All these lawyers, lawmakers, and law enforcers are saying "kids will do it more, kids will do it more, kids will do it more". Plus all the drug ads treat kids like they are constantly on the verge of doing all kinds of drugs which sets up an expectation that they will do it. From kindergarten on, kids are basically having drugs advertised to them by anti-drug warriors. It's no wonder their propaganda doesn't reduce usage rates. Half the people are scared away and half just want to try it even more. However when pot was legal (in some states during the 70's) usage rates actually went down.
By cyberben3d on 09/27/2008 at 4:08:33
Re: Blunt object

That George Soros funded it, doesn't mean it isn't a grass roots thing.

The people of
Massachusetts are experienced with marijuana and understand decriminalization conserves police, prosecution, judicial and probation resources, and is a sensible substitute for the currently imposed dismissal after a period of probation usually recommended by the district attorneys and imposed by the courts.  Our personal experiences explain the success of Mass Cann/ NORML’s Public Policy Questions between 2000 and 2006 (http://masscann.org/legal-reform/cumulative-public-policy-question-results).  

It also explains the results of the
7News/Suffolk University Political Research Center poll announced last August that found, “Seventy-two percent favored the proposed law, which would replace the criminal penalties for possession of up to one ounce of marijuana to a civil penalty of forfeiture of the marijuana and a fine of $100.” (http://www.suffolk.edu/30384.html)

By HumphreyPloughjogger on 09/28/2008 at 7:55:30
Re: Blunt object
That George Soros funded the signature gathering doesn’t mean Question 2 lacks grassroots support.

The people of
Massachusetts are experienced with marijuana and understand decriminalization conserves police, prosecution, judicial and probation resources, and is a sensible substitute for the currently imposed dismissal after a period of probation usually recommended by the district attorneys and imposed by the courts.  Our personal experiences explain the success of Mass Cann/ NORML’s Public Policy Questions between 2000 and 2006.  

It also explains the results of the 7News/Suffolk University Political Research Center poll
announced last August that found, “Seventy-two percent favored the proposed law, which would replace the criminal penalties for possession of up to one ounce of marijuana to a civil penalty of forfeiture of the marijuana and a fine of $100.”
By HumphreyPloughjogger on 09/28/2008 at 7:57:39
Re: Blunt object
That George Soros funded the signature gathering doesn’t mean Question 2 lacks grassroots support.

The people of
Massachusetts are experienced with marijuana and understand decriminalization conserves police, prosecution, judicial and probation resources, and is a sensible substitute for the currently imposed dismissal after a period of probation usually recommended by the district attorneys and imposed by the courts.  Our personal experiences explain the success of Mass Cann/ NORML’s Public Policy Questions between 2000 and 2006.  

It also explains the results of the 7News/Suffolk University Political Research Center poll
announced last August that found, “Seventy-two percent favored the proposed law, which would replace the criminal penalties for possession of up to one ounce of marijuana to a civil penalty of forfeiture of the marijuana and a fine of $100.”
By HumphreyPloughjogger on 09/28/2008 at 7:58:14

ARTICLES BY CHRIS FARAONE
Share this entry with Delicious
  •   IBEW PRESSURES STOP & SHOP  |  November 24, 2009
    Folks driving past suburban Stop & Shop locations this week might wonder why laborers are suddenly concerned about food safety.
  •   TALE OF THE TAPES  |  November 25, 2009
    Soon after music-minded UMass-Boston management professor Pacey Foster signed on to write a Boston chapter for the most comprehensive hip-hop tome ever compiled, his mission brought him to rural Maine, where it has long been speculated that the Hub rhyme scene's Holy Grail is safely stored.
  •   WALE | ATTENTION DEFICIT  |  November 24, 2009
    It turns out there is merit behind the billion-dollar hype machine that’s been propelling Wale since he surfaced on the face of URB two years ago.
  •   REVIEW: THE BLIND SIDE  |  November 17, 2009
    It’s tough for any self-respecting critic to refrain from joyously tackling a Sandra Bullock movie — so it’s a good thing The Blind Side isn’t one.
  •   SWOLLEN MEMBERS | ARMED TO THE TEETH  |  November 18, 2009
    I’m not completely sure why the mere mention of Swollen Members rubs so many underground rap snobs the wrong way.

 See all articles by: CHRIS FARAONE

MOST POPULAR
RSS Feed of for the most popular articles
 Most Viewed   Most Emailed 



  |  Sign In  |  Register
 
thePhoenix.com:
Phoenix Media/Communications Group:
TODAY'S FEATURED ADVERTISERS
Copyright © 2009 The Phoenix Media/Communications Group