The Canadian government’s decision not to appeal the June 2003 Ontario court case legalizing SSM and its subsequent decision to draft legislation legalizing SSM throughout the rest Canada helped lay the foundation for the legalization of SSM in Massachusetts.
Events in Canada could again pave the way for change, however incremental, in the US. This time with regard to marijuana laws.
The impetus for change is coming from the courts. In July Ontario’s marijuana possession laws were struck down by Judge Borenstein. http://www.cbc.ca/... The Borenstein decision will likely not be the only one of its kind. In 2003 the possession laws for 4 Provinces were struck down and there potential for it to be 2003 all over again. http://www.canlii.org/...
With the governing Conservatives promising to crack down on the marijuana trade, things could come to head politically.
The Liberals have long maintained that Canadians should not be saddled with a criminal record for consuming something that is, after all, less harmful than alcohol. It is in this light that former Prime Minster Chrétien famously joked about having a joint in one hand and the money to pay for the fine of having it in the other.
"I will have my money for my fine and a joint in my other hand."
http://www.cbc.ca/... At the same time as they have downplayed the affects of smoking marijuana they have stressed the importance of stiff penalties for trafficking. Taken in isolation such bipolar position has a certain superficial appeal. However, the Liberal policy of decriminalization is inherently incoherent; it is political position; it is an attempt to appeal to both sides of the political divide at the same time and it will not take too much time and effort to show how conflicted the Liberal position is. Indeed, image how ridiculous it would have sounded if this is what Chrétien said?
"I will have my money for my fine and a joint in my other hand. Having paid my fine, I would hope the cops find the person who sold it to me and put him in jail for a very long time."
This is essentially the Liberal’s current position. The problem is if it not already obvious by now that if the act of consumption is not deemed overly ruinous then the whole punitive rationale for trafficking comes crashing down. Add to the mix an acknowledgment that marijuana can serve a medical purpose and the fact that the Liberal dominated senate recommended in the strongest terms that marijuana be legalized and you have a conceptual train wreck as a policy.
http://www.cbc.ca/...
All of this plays right into the Conservatives hands. The public is concerned about the growing number of grow ups and wants something done about it. The Conservatives not only promise action, but are going to blame the Liberals for the increase in grow ups. They are going to say the Liberals have long sent out mixed messages about marijuana. This they will imply, or explicitly say, has led to increased demand for the product and as a consequence an increased number of grow ups to meet the demand.
"We are very concerned about the damage and pain that drugs cause families and we intend to reverse the trend toward vague, ambiguous messaging that has characterized Canadian attitudes in the recent past," Clement said.
According to the United Nations office of Drugs and Crime, Clement said 16.8 per cent of Canadians between the ages of 15 and 64 smoke marijuana.
He said that's the highest rate of any country in the world and the figure is almost equal to the number of tobacco smokers in Canada.
http://www.thestar.com/...
In order to boaster their case the Conservatives are going to force feed the Liberals their own words. One can count on them repeatedly bringing up the Chrétien quote, and former Prime Minster Martin’s response to question about whether he ever smoked marijuana.
"The answer is: I never smoked. I never smoked anything, but there was an earlier time, years ago, when Sheila made some brownies and they did have a strange taste"
. http://www.ctv.ca/... Of course one can find quotes such as these going all the way back to Trudeau. Indeed, Gordon Gibson explained Trudeau’s reaction the Le Dain Commission in the August 4 2005 edition of the Globe and Mail thus:
"The report was released as we were touring a bull-semen facility in Guelph, Ont. (I am not making this up.) The press cared not at all about productive agriculture and totally about weed. At an end-of-tour press conference, the prime minister was asked if he favoured decriminalization. We were in the semen facility's boardroom and it had a blackboard with a permanent picture of Elsie the cow painted on, perhaps in recognition of the customer base. Mr. Trudeau was very quick. Saying not a word, he went to the blackboard, took the chalk and drew a cartoonist's balloon out of the cow's mouth. Inside he slowly wrote, "I like grass!" The room dissolved in laughter."
If the courts do end up striking Canada’s possession laws in BC, Ontario and possibly Quebec, the Conservatives will attack more than just the Liberals. They will be plenty of talk about "activist judges" as well.
The Liberals have only one effective counter to the Conservative attempt to tar them. They can propose to legalize marijuana, but alas I can not see this happening. Amongst other things, this is a party that is afraid of its own shadow and the Bush administration would threaten all sorts of bad things.
The thing is politically it is just crazy enough to work. According to a recent Angus Reid poll 55% of Canadians favor legalization. http://www.angus-reid.com/... That is legalization and not decriminalization. It would also fit right into how the Liberals have approached the last few elections.
It would work out like this.
Harper has been trying to create distance between himself and his social conservative base and the Bush administration ever since he became Prime Minster. If the Liberals promised to legalize marijuana, not only would Harper find himself in lock step with Campaign for Life and Real Women, but Dick Cheney, George Bush, John Walters, Fox news, the Washington Times, James Dobson, Pat Robinson and the faculty at Bob Jones University will line up behind him. The Liberals could play the nationalist card and social conservative card all at once. The thought of being able to strike a fatal blow the US war on drugs will make Canadians a little giddy. If that was not enough, on the flip side of things, a legion of rock stars, intellectuals, movie stars, and high brow magazines, such as the New Yorker and Harper’s will line up behind the Liberals. Canada would again be "cool". Imagine a hundred thousand people or more at a pro legalization concert in Vancouver, say, in the midst of an election campaign. Seattle’s Hempfest regularly draws over a 100,000 and in terms of significance such a concert would, how should I put this?, smoke it. It would not be possible to organize anything now, but should the Liberals announce such a policy now and stave off an election for say another 6 months it may be possible. Dion would certainly not lack for name recognition anymore. Overnight he would become a household name, not just in Canada but abroad as well. Continuing on, such a promise would tear the Right apart. Libertarians and social conservatives would be at each other’s throats and the National, Post and great swaths of the Sun Media chain will side with the Liberals on this one! The National Post Canada’s flag ship of Canadian conservativism has repeatedly called on marijuana to be legalized and has heaped scorn on the Conservative position: For example: March 11 2006
"But even decriminalizing marijuana does not go far enough. Under the Liberals' plan, trading in it would have remained illegal, and even those caught in possession of small amounts would have been subject to fines. In other words, users of a substance less harmful than alcohol and tobacco would still have been targeted by police. And to make matters worse, enforcement tends to be unevenly applied -- the vast majority of marijuana use overlooked while a select few face consequences.
If the widespread use and increasing social acceptance of marijuana are not enough to convince the Tories of the merits of legalization, the dent that it would put in crime should do so. For a government committed to a law-and-order agenda, the opportunity to end a black market should be enticing.
The best reason to change our drug laws, however, remains the principled one. As the Tories have recognized on other issues, Canadians are capable of making their own decisions without government holding their hands. Do they really need state protection from pot?
Last but not least the Conservatives would left defending a bunch of talking points that are so discredited they are considered a form of "madness", "reefer madness".
Perhaps the NDP would be interested. By moving around the Liberals Left flank on the marijuana the same way they did on Afghanistan issue the NDP may be able to create needed distance between themselves and Liberals and Bloc in very socially liberal Montreal while at the same time appealing to BC voters, who lead the country in supporting legalization.