One 2018 pot-legalization ballot measure is not like the other? No, they’re both awful.
This week KSFY News had a story about how the backers of one pro-pot legalization measure was not happy with the other pro-pot legalization measure being prepared for the ballot. And they’re mad at the Attorney General too:
“Signer beware” is the message from a pro-pot organization in South Dakota that’s hoping to bring the issue of marijuana legalization to the ballot next year. New Approach South Dakota isn’t talking about the two petitions they have circulating to legalize marijuana for medical and recreational purposes – they’re talking about a separate effort that would accomplish the same thing, but with some major differences.
According to the Attorney General’s explanation, differences like a lot less tax revenue for the state and a whole lot less regulation of the drug, but New Approach isn’t happy about their AG explanation.
“New Approach,” the group fronted by former Democrat District 19 House candidate Melissa Mentele is complaining about the pot legalization measure from the John Dale and his group “Cannabis Consumers for Liberty (CC4L)” competing against her own, bemoaning it’s “less tax revenue for the state and a whole lot less regulation of the drug.”
I’m forced to ask the obvious: “Is she kidding?” Both are about legalizing drugs.
I’m not going to get into the weeds on which pot legalization measure is the worse measure, the CC4L measure which mandates April 20th as “pot day” at South Dakota State Parks, or the New Approach measure which mandates that all non-violent pot sentences be re-worked:
I did ask Attorney General Marty Jackley for his thoughts:
As Attorney General, it is my position that the legalization of marijuana creates significant public health and safety concerns. If research determines there is a medical value in marijuana or its derivatives, it should be prescribed by a physician and dispensed by a pharmacist just like any controlled substance.
My office is required to prepare a fair and concise explanation for proposed ballot measures and to defend such measures if passed and challenged in court, whether I agree with them or not. In the proposed marijuana measure that includes reviewing previous criminal convictions, I have set forth “Because its full scope and effect are unclear, judicial or legislative clarification will be necessary. A court may find provisions of the measure unconstitutional.” I would point out that Article IV, Section 3 of our State Constitution vests the authority and discretion for criminal sentence commutations with the Governor.
There is currently a national drug epidemic that is also affecting South Dakota, rather than weakening our State laws, I encourage us to focus our efforts and resources on strong enforcement against drug traffickers and prevention efforts especially for our youth such as “No Meth Ever” and the anonymous texting “Standup Project.”
Whether it is the CC4L measure promoting a state park recognized Pot Day, or the pot related get-out-of-jail free cards New Approach wants, both measures are so phenomenally awful, that forget any impending campaigns, anyone who signs the petitions to put them on the ballot should be questioned for not having the sense that God gave them.
When it comes to both pot and pot petitions, the best course of action is to “Just Say No.”