Loading

Poll: Record Percentage Of Californians Backing Adult Use Initiative

  • by Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director September 7, 2016

    AUMAMore than seven in ten Californians say that they favor voting ‘yes’ on Proposition 64: the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, according to polling data compiled by the CALSPEAKS Opinion Research Center at Sacramento State.

    Seventy-one percent of respondents say that they are leaning toward voting in favor of the statewide initiative. Public support is strongest among those between the ages of 18 and 34 (84 percent) Latinos (81 percent), Democrats (80 percent), those between the ages of 50 and 64 (74 percent), and Independents (72 percent).

    The poll’s margin of error is +/- four percentage points.

    Polling data compiled last month by by the Institute of Government Studies at the University of California, Berkeley reported that 64 percent of California voters believe, “Marijuana should be legal for adults to purchase and use recreationally, with government regulations similar to the regulation of alcohol.”

    Proposition 64 permits adults to legally grow (up to six plants) and possess personal use quantities of cannabis (up to one ounce of flower and/or up to eight grams of concentrate) while also licensing commercial cannabis production and retail sales. The measure prohibits localities from taking actions to infringe upon adults’ ability to possess and cultivate cannabis for non-commercial purposes. The initiative language specifies that it is not intended to “repeal, affect, restrict, or preempt … laws pertaining to the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.” Proposition 64 is endorsed by the ACLU of California, the California Democratic Party, the California Medical Association, California Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, the California NAACP, the Drug Policy Alliance, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, and NORML.

    Similar adult use measures will also appear on the ballot this November in Arizona, Maine, Massachusetts, and Nevada.

    A summary of 2016 statewide ballot measures and their status is online here.

    22 Responses to “Poll: Record Percentage Of Californians Backing Adult Use Initiative”

    1. Cisco Kid says:

      Watch this get knocked down.

      • Julian says:

        Ye of little faith; was a friend of mine: Even the +65 age group in California is in a healthy majority favor of full legalization. Even fear campaigns or court opinions funded by Project SAM or Sheldon Adeldon can’t bring public opinion down to stop this train to the Good Strain.

        For fu€ks sake, Microsoft already merged with Kind. And homegrow is in AUMA. There’s no turning back from marijuana legalization. This is the pivoting point in our movement. But remember how long it took us to get here, so don’t go shootin yer guns on those weed-smokin roof tops yet, There’s still work to do, fellow citizen lobbyists. Keep amending until public education and public health are the target of fairly taxed revenue from marijuana. Don’t surrender just because some sold out Judge scratches that out like they did to Arizona. Take the truth to Congress if you want Congress to bring truth to you…

    2. Mark Mitcham says:

      I recently summarized the NORML Congressional Scorecard for California. While you’re voting for legalization in California, please fire all prohibitionist politicians!

      Here it is:

      California Scorecard:

      Senators:
      Dianne Feinstein (D): “D”
      Barbara Boxer (D): “C”

      Reps:
      Doug LaMalfa (R): “F”
      Jared Huffman (D): “A”
      John Garamendi (D): “B”
      Tom McClintock (R): “B”
      Mike Thompson (D): “B”
      Doris Matsui (D): “B”
      Ami Bera (D): “B”
      Paul Cook (R): “D”
      Jerry McNerney (D): “B”
      Jeff Denham (R): “F”
      Mark DeSaulnier (D): “B”
      Nancy Pelosi (D): “B”
      Barbara Lee (D): “A”
      Jackie Speier (D): “B”
      Eric Swalwell (D): “A”
      Jim Costa (D): “B”
      Mike Honda (D): “A”
      Anna Eshoo (D): “B”
      Zoe Lofgren (D): “B”
      Sam Farr (D): “B”
      David Valadao (R): “D”
      Devin Nunes (R): “D”
      Kevin McCarthy (R): “D”
      Lois Capps (D): “B”
      Steve Knight (R): “D”
      Julia Brownley (D): “B”
      Judy Chu (D): “B”
      Adam Schiff (D): “B”
      Tony Cardenas (D): “B”
      Brad Sherman (D): “B”
      Pete Aguilar (D): “B”
      Grace Napolitano (D): “B”
      Ted Lieu (D): “A”
      Xavier Becerra (D): “B”
      Norma Torres (D): “B”
      Raul Ruiz (D): “B”
      Karen Bass (D): ? no grade?
      Linda Sanchez (D): “B”
      Ed Royce (R): “D”
      Lucille Roybal-Allard (D): “C”
      Mark Takano (D): “B”
      Ken Calvert (R): “C”
      Maxine Waters (D): “B”
      Janice Hahn (D): “B”
      Mimi Walters (R): “D”
      Loretta Sanchez (D): “B”
      Alan Lowenthal (D): “A”
      Dana Rohrabacher (R): “A”
      Darrell Issa (R): “D”
      Duncan D. Hunter (R): “B”
      Juan Vargas (D): “B”
      Scott Peters (D): “B”
      Susan Davis (D): “B”

      For details, go to:
      NORML congressional scorecard
      http://norml.org/congressional-scorecard

      [Paul Armentano responds: Look for an updated version of the NORML Scorecard, weighing relevant 2016 votes, to be released later this month.]

      • Julian says:

        Great work, Mark. And thank you Paul for the update;
        I realize we need to up our NORML donations for this vital investigative work to build a well checked Democracy with well regulated and fairly taxed marijuana, but I pray your “relevant votes” count will someday include candidates running against incumbents… That is, not only a Congressional scorecard, but one that included a Congressional Election Scorecard.
        Estimate the costs by comparing the existing scorecard and doubling it. Set a goal and we’ll crowdfund it. Legalize it and I will advertise it!

      • RS says:

        As a California resident I email Feinstein often informing her of the virtues of marijuana both medicinally and recreationally. Hoping she will change her mind and support our cause. Senator Chuck Grassley is also a prohibitionist. He is a Republican but then again so is Congressman Dana Rohrabacher and he is the best friend we ever had. Sorry if that is a little defensive but I don’t want this to get politicalized. Marijuana legalization is bipartisan. Either pro or con it is bipartisan. If you wish to join me in convincing them that marijuana is beneficial you are more than welcomed to join me. Their contact info: Feinstein: https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/e-mail-me

        Senator Chuck Grassley: https://www.grassley.senate.gov/constituents/questions-and-comments

        Both Feinstein and Grassley are members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Any amendments to criminal law that originates from the Senate has to go through them. If we can get Feinstein and/or Grassley to side with us that would help a lot.

        As far as Boxer is concerned she does support the CARERS Act so that is a plus. If you wish to contact her: https://www.boxer.senate.gov/?p=shareyourviews

        If you wish to comment to your Congressional Representative that would help too: http://www.house.gov/representatives/

        Whether good or bad.

    3. mexweed says:

      One ounce of flower after #16 sifting reduces to 900-1000 single one-heater vapetokes (average 25 mg each) after removing stems (to TeaPPot) and seeds (to FlowerPPot). If a gram costs $10 that is $0.25 a toke.

      I average 500 single tokes a year (rarely wait longer than 2 days Abstinence Recharge or do more than 2 in a day Dynamic Moderation) costing under $150 a year.

      In this prolonged age of Nostalgic Joint Binge $moking Mythology, one source says “average recreational user spends $647 annually on marijuana”. My practice might be more typical of Inspirational and Occupational users, both widely ignored till now in the media haste to promote “recreational” which means spend binge money enriching hucksters and then waste the cannabinoid with faulty Combustion-centered use procedures.

      I agree with promoting this Initiative, incremental is better than nothing, it keeps the discussion and the experimentation and the Learning going. Vote Yes on 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2!

      • caliweed says:

        Yes on 32, mexweed!

        I guess.

      • Richard says:

        Max weed
        A good use practice. Well done!
        Used as a catalyst is best.

        I have experienced both type of application and Dynamic Moderation it is preferred. I typically consume edibles as a method of ingesting 20-35 mg once and sometimes twice per day regiment. Vape CO2 extracted. All medications are tested by reputable lab and certified.
        Regards, Richard

      • Richard says:

        mexweed,

        A good use practice. Well done!
        Used as a catalyst is best.

        I have experienced both types of application, over consumption and Dynamic Moderation. I prefer the dynamic modeI and C typically consume edibles as a method of ingesting 20-35 mg once and or sometimes twice per day regiment. I will use Vape for immediate effect and only use CO2 extracted oil from one reputable provider only All medications are tested and certified by the same reputable lab.

        Regards, Richard

    4. Evening Bud says:

      Come on, Cal, I have my fingers crossed. Legalization in the country’s most populated and most economically important state would certainly drop the prohibitionists for an 8 count. They wouldn’t be knocked out quite yet, but their legs would definitely be wobbly.

    5. Matthew says:

      Don’t take this for granted – I’ve already given $1800 just this week alone… We’ve got to really slam dunk California victorious !!

    6. Matt says:

      as they should. We MUST secure California this year. Would be nice to have the entire West Coast secured with the exception of Hawaii. I maintain, however, we MUST move on to states outside the West and the two on the East. I would LIKE to see more effort made in the Midwest out here, perhaps start with liberal Wisconsin, Minnesota….break in random Central and at least one Southern state, would be nice as well. Small New England acquisitions are probably coming next, that is nice and all, but we need more, badly. Movement is very fragile still. New York, frankly would be the jewel in the CROWN of the East. Getting New York would be HUGE, even bigger perhaps than Texas or Florida, which would also be nice gains. Maybe we could aim for the Carolinas, Georgia….in the West, we are mopping up the last states. To the immediate East is a WALL of Red States, and I suspect MORE lawsuits if Nevada legalizes, Utah, Idaho, Ok, Kansas, maybe Wyoming and Nebraska again might all join up to once again petition the SCOTUS. Not going to give ideas though. We need more states, we MUST secure the West this November, but, in the future, coastal regions and near coastal regions are not good enough anymore. We need central states and some in the Midwest. Use some of the money from the legalization in other states. Stop partying it up and start sending us some money so WE can raise the sigs in time, like in MI to legalize. I feel the states that have legalized need to start helping us out out here who still are stuck in outdated Prohibition. THANK YOU.

    7. Matt says:

      Just look at the Republican scores…it’s just DISGUSTING.

      • Matt says:

        I am replying to Mark with this post.

        • Mark Mitcham says:

          We have to fire all drug-warrior politicians who support marijuana prohibition, whether Democratic or Republican. They gotta go!

          And they will, if we VOTERS consistently and repeatedly punish those politicians who are so determined to punish us!

          The prohibitionist politicians ignore the street protests, and they respond to our phone calls and emails with arrogant defiance. They promote violence and inequality in our society. There is only one way to get rid of the varmits: we have to vote as marijuana consumers.

          The game is economically rigged against us: sometimes it’s a choice between the “good cop” who is against legalization and wants us in rehab, and the “bad cop” who is against legalization and wants us in prison.

          In a case like that, you can still fire the most crazy and vicious of the two. Make ’em feel the heat! Now and forever!

    8. Anon says:

      How would this affect the cirrent medical laws?

    9. Julian says:

      Here is an interesting article showing why the price of legal Colorado marijuana is going down:

      https://www.google.com/amp/www.fool.com/amp/investing/2016/09/11/legal-marijuana-prices-are-plunging-in-colorado-bu.aspx?client=safari

      But not because of increased competition as one would suspect; Colorado extended a moratorium on issuing licenses to new dispensaries so the new licenses opening up north of Denver for example are going to owned by the existing big players. The catch for low prices is there are no limits to how much weed Colorado can grow so the big marijuana players, (for lack of calling them something as big as the agribusiness lobby which would include Monsantos), can flood the market with awesome seed-picked weed strains, which in turn sparks interest and demand from both investors and consumers. As a result, not only does anyone within a day’s drive from Colorado get really great weed for a low price, the quality and quantity is drowning out the moldy pesticide-ridden crap on the black market.
      Even better, the failure to synthesize marijuana keeps big pharma, big agribusiness, the FDA and patenting out of the game, so does the DEA’s decision to keep marijuana in schedule 1; going to any other schedule instead of descheduling is a real threat to the big marijuana Colorado players.
      Which leads us to the obvious question; What the hell is going to happen to the price of state-legalized weed and the black market when California legalizes?
      A question I will try to answer in the next post…

    10. Anonymous says:

      Affordable and effective marijuana will flood the US market from California regardless of water restrictions or a seedless oligopoly brewing in Colorado.
      So lets focus on one spot in California; silcone valley.
      Most of us have heard by now about Microsoft’s merger with seed-to-sale marijuana tech firm, Kind. And its no big secret that Bill Gates consumes some real potent weed. But what defines a marijuana “investor”? And what does “seed-to-sale really mean? And where the hell did all the seeds go anyway?
      Marijuana “investors” need to be divided between those who are already licensed and those who may not yet have a dog in the fight to get prosecuted for, (since they aren’t trafficking or in possession) but possess major capital to corner, let’s say, the entire tech market for the marijuana industries. (Cue the Windows start-up sound). The article linked previously talks about penny stocks, but screw that, what about the that seed-to-sale software? Who gets those state contracts? & was this a major factor for the sudden jolt in Michigan of mmj legalization out of their Senate committee?;

      http://mjbizdaily.com/michigan-senate-passes-statewide-medical-marijuana-regulations/

      Tech firms like Microsoft have a big role to play to convince legislators the legal revenue is manageable. So we as consumers need to regulate the way these tech contracts are awarded and keep legislators in check by citizen lobbying and voting with our dollars;
      We vote for fairly taxed, safe and effective marijuana. But we must amend laws that won’t allow us to self-medicate with at least 6 plants and share our viable heirloom seeds. And the software better be transparent and allow us to see the proceeds enter public education and public health budgets. Otherwise were just swapping the black market for more bureaucracy. Some states like Arizona are omitting revenue for public education. Its our job as marijuana consumers to put that back in.

    Leave a Reply