[paxys]

Funny enough in this case how Kamala Harris feels might be more important, since she'll likely cast the deciding vote in the Senate. I can't see Biden vetoing the legalization bill if it passes both chambers, regardless of his personal views.

[GeekyBear]

Typically, the Vice President will follow the President's agenda, regardless of how they personally feel.

I'm sure she'll offer her views privately and then follow the President's lead publicly, just as Biden did when he opposed Obama's Afghanistan surge and remaining there forever.

However, on this issue, a group of Republicans and Democrats have been renewing a ban on using Federal dollars to prosecute individuals for pot in states where it is legal since the Obama years, regardless of which party controls the Senate.

[dragonwriter]

> However, on this issue, a group of Republicans and Democrats have been renewing a ban on using Federal dollars to prosecute individuals for pot in states where it is legal since the Obama years, regardless of which party controls the Senate.

Only where the use is consistent with state law limited to medical use; the House tried to expand that to include state law covering non-medical use in 2019 and 2020, but in both cases this change was not included in matching Senate bills and not restored in reconciliation of the bills.

[chmod600]

Why do you think the Senate will tie?

[GeekyBear]

Congress has been using their power of the purse to forbid using Federal dollars to prosecute people and businesses in states where pot is legal every year since 2014.

https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-medical-pot-20141216-st...

Although the courts eventually had to shut down the Obama DOJ for continuing to prosecute in those states anyway.

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-medical-pot-201...

The votes are there when you aren't openly calling what you are doing "full legalization".

[dragonwriter]

> Congress has been using their power of the purse to forbid using Federal dollars to prosecute those in states where pot is legal every year since 2014.

No, they prohibit prosecuting use consistent with state medical use laws; in both 2019 and 2020 the House voted to extend that to state-legal use generally, but the Senate didn’t go along. (The House, but not the Senate, also passed a decriminalization bill in 2020.)

[GeekyBear]

I seem to remember the Trump DOJ threatening to renew prosecutions and members of Congress making it clear that they would expand the prosecution ban if they had to.

They are perfectly willing to make pot legal, however, they prefer to avoid looking like they are doing so as long as possible.

Biden's open opposition is the bigger issue here. Lets not forget who was behind a lot of the drug war legislation.

>Biden was a major Democratic leader in spearheading America’s war on drugs during the 1980s and ’90s.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/4/25/18282870/j...

[dragonwriter]

> I seem to remember the Trump DOJ threatening to renew prosecutions and members of Congress making it clear that they would expand the prosecution ban if they had to.

If its not “sufficient numbers of Republican members of the Senate to force McConnell to actually allow it on the floor”—and it wasn’t—it was an empty threat; the House actually passed an expanded prosecution ban twice and a general decriminalization, none of those made it into any bill on the Senate floor.

> Biden's open opposition is the bigger issue here.

Not really, Biden publicly supports legalization of medical marijuana, decriminalization, rescheduling, permitting state choice on legalization, and automatic record expungement. This differs from federal legalization substantively only in that there would be federal backup for states that choose not to legalize, and has not openly opposed (or supported) the stronger legalization proposals now being announced by, among others, much of the Democratic Senate leadership.

The only meaningful barrier to something very close to full legalization is support in the Senate, mainly the potential of a filibuster, but there’s a couple uncertain D votes (like Manchin) that could prevent even a bare majority.

The President and the majority of the Democratic caucus have different positions, but not far enough apart to be a real barrier to lawmaking.

> Biden was a major Democratic leader in spearheading America’s war on drugs during the 1980s and ’90s.

Yeah, but its not the 80s and 90s; its the 2020s, and Biden has a very different position today.

[GeekyBear]

You seem to be discussing a different Biden than the one we have.

>This month, something unusual happened: Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer took a stand against President Joe Biden.

The New York Democrat, typically a strong Biden ally, has transformed into one of the Senate’s biggest advocates for marijuana legalization, which Biden continues to oppose. But Schumer said he’ll move forward with his legalization bill anyway.

...based on his public remarks, [Biden] seems genuinely conservative on the issue — arguing only for decriminalization (in which the threat of jail or prison time is removed for possession, but sales remain illegal), and calling for “more scientific investigations” into the issue, particularly whether pot is a “gateway drug.”

Biden, after all, not just supported but spearheaded many of the country’s current drug war policies. During the 1980s and ’90s, he backed and helped write bill after bill that toughened federal criminal penalties against all sorts of drugs. Biden has since admitted to going too far in at least some respects, but this is where he built his early political career.

https://www.vox.com/22387746/biden-marijuana-weed-legalizati...

[chmod600]

I don't see why that means there will be a tie.

[GeekyBear]

>The votes are there

I'm not saying there will be a tie. I'm saying the votes to pass it are there.

Senators have just been afraid to openly support it.