Lobbyists are removing abounding off a fight on pot (Why we can’t have good things)
I advise we take a discerning wander over to Republic Report, where Lee Fang is attack them out of a park. (We featured Fang’s stating in one of a drone U.S. airspace stories. He found a congressman that a worker run had handsomely bought, Rep. Buck McKeon, and laid out a quid and a quo. Nice work.)
Here’s Fang’s investigative piece on where most of a income to quarrel California Prop 19, a Pro-Marijuana proposition, came from (as usual, my emphasis):
John Lovell is a lobbyist who creates a lot of income from creation certain we can’t fume a joint. That’s his job. He’s a lobbyist for a military unions in Sacramento, and he is a driving force behind grabbing Federal dollars to close down a California pot industry. I’ll get to a justification on this critical story in a bit, though first, some context.
At some indicate in a apart past, a quarrel on drugs competence have been popular. But not anymore — a polling is clear[.] … So since do we still put hundreds of thousands of people in steel cages for pot-related offenses? Well, there are many reasons, though one of them is, of course, money in politics.
About that money:
In 2010, California deliberate Prop 19, a magnitude to legalize pot and taxation it as alcohol. The tender gained more votes than Meg Whitman, a former eBay executive and Republican gubernatorial hopeful that year, though unsuccessful to pass. …
Lovell managed a antithesis debate opposite Prop 19. … Republic Report reviewed lobbying contracts during a Prop 19 fight, and found that Lovell’s organisation was paid over $386,350 from a far-reaching array of military unions, including a California Police Chiefs Association. …
There is large income in pot prohibition.
The rest of Fang’s story sum where that income comes from and only how most is accessible for lobbyists like Lovell and their clients. (Hint: Millions. Source: Barack Obama’s need to seem “tough on crime” — my comment, not Fang’s).
And unless we consider it’s only cops opposite to drugs (because they can get Federal grants to do so, among other reasons), Fang’s investigate uncovers a obvious:
The stars — and a incentives, and a drink and ethanol companies — are aligned opposite you, folks. It’s since we can’t fume good things.
(To follow on Twitter: @Gaius_Publius)
Article source: http://www.americablog.com/2012/03/why-you-cant-have-nice-thingslobbyists.html
Partner Links: http://www.techgurutoday.com/
Note: The Articles are taken from Feeds, used for informational purposes and submitted by users. If you think your articles/blogs are being misused, please email us and we will take them off. Thanks