Part 7: The foot-in-the-door theory is flawed
The foot-in-the-door theory suggests that any rights are better than no rights.
The door to further “privileges,” left slightly ajar, will undoubtedly swing open wider sometime in the future. Therefore, it doesn’t necessarily matter whether activists get things right in the present.
Or so the theory goes.
The foot-in-the-door theory tantalizes herbal rights activists with possibility: after your state self-sentences itself to insanely restrictive MMJ initiatives, you may be rewarded with a lighter ball and a shorter chain for good behavior.
Wouldn’t you know it, yours truly — MMJ’s biggest critic — has benefited more from the foot-in-the-door theory than anyone on earth.
That’s because by dumb luck I happen to live in the 80210 zip code — epicenter of cannabis commerce, MMJ style. Thirty dispensaries await my patronage within walking distance. Groomed strains of indica and sativa compete for my affection from alluring display cases. Smiling Hooters chicks hover behind, like medical marijuana nurses, ready to service my needs.
“A little White Lightning for you today sir, perhaps?”
“Mmm, magnificent bouquet. Pungent and skunky with a tinge of tangerine. Ah yes — the west side of the budyard.”
If I was a selfish, sexist pig who didn’t care about anyone else or the fate of a nation, I’d be in hog heaven. But what if I lived in Shelby, Wyoming? Then I’d be living in the one state which voted redder in the 2008 elections than it did in the 2004 elections.
Who’d be looking out for me, then?
I would hope it would be the same white-haired guy with the goatee and the red, white, and blue tophat who looked out for freedom in the dark days of slavery. The same guy who stepped in when it looked like Mormons might mind-control the morals of every Utahan. The same guy who’s job it is to keep states from going off on goofy tangents that trample the constitution.
That same avuncular dude who’s been kind enough to look the other way at the MMJ nests all over my hood.
He certainly doesn’t have to, the way federal law reads now.
Which is why I know how fortunate I am that I’ve been able to squeeze in a lot of schmooze time with dispensary personnel manning the local candy stores “official State of Colorado Medical Marijuana Centers” nearby. Poteconomics intrigues me. Coverage in Cannabis Commerce interests them. Opinions straight from the horse’s mouth are always on offer. I don’t have to imagine what business owners think about ever-changing MMJ regulations. Or how the constant barrage of new bills affects their ability to run their businesses — that is, if they can stay in business long enough to assimilate the changes.
So, when I tell you that after two years of patronizing Denver’s finest dispensaries, what I’ve seen so far is not a door swinging open wider, it’s a door slamming shut faster, I might just possibly know what I’m talking about.
When I make a statement like, “In MMJ states, you may imagine you’ll get more rights in the future, but I know you’ll get less rights in the present,” it’s because I’ve seen the consequences of the foot-in-the-door theory with my own eyes, in the broad light of day.
I don’t have to wonder if seventy-five percent of the thirty dispensaries I can walk to have changed ownership and management structure at least once in the scant two years they’ve been in existence. I know from personally observing “empirical data” that they have.
A turnover rate like that exists because when you’ve got your foot stuck in the door, and a Colorado Department of Revenue official slams it shut, the casualties start piling up pretty quickly.
There’s a big price to pay for winning crippled medical marijuana initiatives — they’re a bitch to upgrade later.
How did California Proposition 19 turn out? Shot down in flames, if I recall.
Now Colorado’s making its own dash for freedom. The hope is that the same, “no problem, we can always upgrade later” rationale which didn’t sway California will somehow carry the day at higher altitude. Excuse me if I’m not swept up in all the excitement.
I’ll start racing my engine when that guy in Shelby, Wyoming gets taken care of, too.
To upgrade herbal rights that you’ve already voted for … sometime later … when the world’s a better and brighter place . . . after the dawning of the Age of Aquarius … if Jesus comes back to earth … your MMJ state must:
- Not have elected local and state legislators who consider it their god-given duty to overregulate MMJ yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Good luck.
- Collect enough signatures to get your “upgrade” onto a state ballot.
- Word your referendum so people know what the heck you’re talking about. People need to know what they’re voting for or against, and which box on the ballot they’re supposed to check or punch to accomplish that. Many voters scan referendum language for the first time minutes before they cast their ballot.
- Finance a campaign against well-heeled opposition.
- Run an exhaustive campaign.
- Win the election against tenacious opposition.
- Etch your newly won freedom into the state constitution, ensuring that the opposition won’t be able to delete your hard-won gains ever again [theoretically].
Add it all up, and it amounts to not a whole lot more energy than it would have taken to repeal prohibition in the first place.
So, in a country where polls indicate that there are well over 100 million voters in favor of repealing prohibition, why is the MMJ brigade so quick to stick its feet in the door instead of bashing it in altogether?
Is it because they’re copycats copying the wrong cats? Yes.
Is it because they’re addicted to the tranquilizing drug of gradualism? Yes.
Is it because they’ve turned their backs on the lessons of history when they could have learned from the struggles of civil rights, gay rights, women’s rights, and Indian rights? Yes.
Is it because they’re perfectly willing to win a battle but lose a war? Yes.
Is it because they’re disorganized, haven’t agreed upon a common goal, and have failed to put a face on the organization? Yes.
But the #1 reason feet get slammed in the door is the misguided perception that winning constricted, statewide, patients-only MMJ initiatives is a whole lot easier than repealing prohibition.
Actually, trying to accumulate patients’ rights state-by-state is at least fifty times harder.
Think about it.
It’s fifty times harder because there are fifty states. That means you have to win fifty elections for sure. However, we’re talking about winning the same state all over again, in an attempt to pry the door open further. Regarding California Proposition 19, it would appear that even had that bill been passed, the state would still have had to upgrade its herbal rights yet again until these approached a level of freedom repealing prohibition would have delivered. Now how many elections have to be won? Eighty? One hundred and twenty?
When does it end?
Just for grins, let’s imagine I’ve got this all wrong.
Assume for a moment that the mission of repealing prohibition is more difficult than winning crippled MMJ initiatives over fifty times. OK. If you’ve already waited out eighty years of marijuana prohibition, what’s waiting another year to get the job done right once and for all?
Folks, I’m talking about getting marijuana legalized for everyone, forever, instead of for hardly anyone, for as long as it takes until fickle state legislators decide to pass dynamic laws which force MMJ businesses and caregivers onto the street — at which point you have to hold a whole new referendum to get what you thought you already had.
Which one of those choices works better for you?
Not there yet? No problem. Let’s keep going.
Say you want to build a bridge from Point A [selling marijuana is a criminal act] to Point B [unfettered cannabis commerce lives and breathes]. Why go through all the aggravation of passing a referendum to fund a structure which spans one-twentieth of the gap?
Who knows if and when funds will become available “tomorrow” to complete the rest of the bridge?
Yet that’s exactly how MMJ initiatives are built. “We’ll take what they give us, then we’ll come back for more . . . when the powers-that-be are in a good mood.” How often was Stalin in a good mood?
Meanwhile, repealing prohibition is one good March on Washington away! That statement is based on actual historical events that have been documented, photographed, and filmed — not on personal opinion. It is a fact, not a supposition, that all through the 20th century, virtually every rights group that showed up en masse in Washington, DC wound up getting exactly what it went there for.
Look it up. Google “marches on Washington.” Don’t take my word for it.
Taking over the nation’s capital is a winning tactic because it’s a whole lot easier for the White House to ignore what it can’t see than have to account for legions of “stoners” screaming “Legalize It” through bullhorns, brandishing pitchforks, torches, and bongs along Pennsylvania Avenue.
That is the appropriate remedy for repealing prohibition.
What’s the foot-in-the-door theory compared to marching on Washington a half million strong?
Need more? Happy to oblige.
Taking a mulligan on already-passed statewide marijuana legislation invites any number of wild cards to the party.
When California initially approved “medical marijuana” in 1996 — yes, it took twelve years for legalese on paper to become brick and mortar on a street — the maneuvering flew under the radar of outlaw growers. Come 2008, who was hurt the most by competition with retail MMJ outlets? Outlaw growers. Who do cognoscenti credit for shooting down California Proposition 19? None other than outlaw growers — not bible thumpers from Orange County.
Then there’s the matter of wording your proposition, a rocky field to plow. This Sensible Colorado missive captures a sense of the tribulation involved:
As you might have read or heard, a broad coalition of organizations that includes Sensible Colorado has submitted language for a 2012 statewide legalization initiative in Colorado. We went through an exceptionally exhaustive five-plus-month process to produce the filed initiative language, which we believe is incredibly strong and presents the best route to ending marijuana prohibition here in Colorado. We coordinated with dozens of organizations, attorneys, activists, patients, marijuana business owners, and other stakeholders, both in Colorado and around the country. We also solicited comments from the public via our organizations’ lists of thousands of Colorado reform supporters, magazine ads, and events around the state.
My reaction? Great. Why didn’t you make that Herculean effort in the first place? I’m supposed to live and die with this crusade’s ups and downs for over a year?
Any state, which doesn’t already have MMJ laws, can become the first state to pass full-on legalization [which would still be in conflict with federal law] by executing Sensible Colorado’s battle plan from the get-go — not after you already voted to accept one-twentieth the freedom that you really wanted in the first place.
Which state has the cojones to do that?
Better yet, which coalition of activists groups has the right stuff to overturn federal prohibition?
As I write this, the answer is “none.” They won’t be marching on Washington anytime soon.
Their feet are stuck in the door.
Table of Contents:
Part 1: Dynamic MMJ laws force businesses onto the streetPart 2: MMJ limits cannatax to a fraction of what it could be
Part 3: MMJ limits job incubation to a fraction of what it could be
Part 4: MMJ limits cannabis' contribution to GDP to a fraction of what it could be
Part 5: Ironically, MMJ blocks clinical research into cannabis’ healing properties
Part 6: It's taking the tranquilizing drug of gradualism
Part 7: The foot-in-the-door theory is flawed
Part 8: Emphasizing MMJ in the present pushes true legalization back to the future
Part 9: MMJ trivializes recreational and industrial use
Part 10: Fuck the patients
[Bonus] Part 11: It keeps 45,000 pot "offenders" imprisoned
[Bonus] Part 12: It keeps the DEA in business
[Bonus] Part 13: Cities and counties can vote it out anytime
7 comments
Thomas Chong says:
Jul 25, 2011
You must remember medical marijuana has opened the door that can never be shut again so rather than oppose or criticize the the “medical approach”, embrace it. The truth is we all smoke for a medical reason whether we know it or not. Stress relief is probably the number one “medical” reason we healthy people smoke it. “It relaxes me”. ” Helps me enjoy my time off” or helps me enjoy doing boring things. Airline pilots use it for long flights. Athletes use it to wind down after a hard game or practice. Stress relief. But the most compelling argument has to be the “take it or leave it” qualities. Pot is not physically addicting. Studies have shown people who smoked for years can and have stopped cold turkey with no physical side effects. And the good news is stopping a heavy pot habit can be beneficial to ones well being. So don’t get cute and knock the medical approach and realize the number one harmful addiction in America is junk food.
This addiction is killing Americans faster than drunk drivers. Over eating leads to heart problems, diabetics, and a host of other ailments that is encouraged by our so-called American culture of television ads and sit/coms that promote unhealthy habits as a way of life rather than a way of death. Pot, hemp, cannibis was given to us by our Creator when the Universe was created.”I give thee Green Herb and it shall be for meat” Genesis 29. And it was the disgraced President Nixon who gave us the DEA criminal gang and the money draining drug laws. So lets support the medical approach toward pot and educate the masses about the many ills pot can help with instead of trying to be ultra clever with the outlaw comedian approach….tc
Lory Kohn says:
Jul 25, 2011
I could take exception to several of your points. However, you are the co-author of the immortal lines:
mama try to tell me
try to tell me how to live
but I don’t listen to her
cause my head is like a sieve
So you can write whatever you want, whenever you want to write it, and I’ll be grateful for the contribution. Thank you for taking the time to comment.
Don McAdams says:
Oct 15, 2011
Len Richmond’s movie is excellent. Under your picture of the youtube video, you state that, “Schedule 1 drugs can’t be tested on humans.” This is actually not the case. NIDA has a mandate that no Schedule 1 drugs can be tested for any benefits, but tests for potential harm are ran all the time. For a host of research, I recommend, well, Len Richmond’s movie. As something just as valuable, if not more so, is this 20 minute seminar from Dr. Abrams, http://projectcbd.org/Medicine.html#CME . He has over 30 years of NIDA funded MJ research that he talks about, as well as other research being done around the world, Dr. Guzman’s work from Spain being the most ground-breaking to date, mitigating glioblastoma multiforme, or brain tumors. Then I would suggest Dr. Tashkin’s NIDA funded 30+ year study confirming no link to MJ and lung cancer – it even suggested a protective effect from the cigarette smokers. I agree with Tommy Chong and Jack Herer – all use is medical. That being said, the MMJ initiatives may have a huge flaw of not offering enough, especially in the way of research, but it was a necessary step. We would never be talking about full legalization or repealing Prohibition 2 in a serious tone today if it wasn’t for the MMJ road paved for US. And yes, certain indicas high in CBD are better for physical treatments, while sativas high in THC and THCV are better for mental treatments, so recommended strains for the ailments isn’t entirely voodoo… You do bring up a necessary reminder for US all, though – no matter if we’re doing a medical or recreational attempt, research should always be included in the wording…
Lory Kohn says:
Oct 19, 2011
I disagree with your theory that MMJ is paving the way for full legalization, as opposed to blocking it — but respect your opinion. More on this soon. btw, is cannabis effective against spam?
Don McAdams says:
Oct 25, 2011
There is some truth that if Cali would have fully legalized cannabis in ’96, we could likely have 16 legal states today instead of medical states. The growing plethora of medical research could very likely have kept cannabis in a medical box for some time, and may have slowed the repeal / legalize progress. Considering how rigid the government still is on “legalizing,” though, medical really was (and unfortunately still is for the most part) the best avenue to get some freedom. I agree that there needs to be a break from medical to legal, and that would have been nice to see happen already. I believe that its lack of harm and vast medical efficacy will create a rapid shift from medical to repeal very soon, though, and that, almost unarguably, would have never been possible had cannabis not been a hot topic already these past several years, and that would have never happened without mmj initiatives being passed by the People. Perhaps it’s not really a paved road. It’s more like a dirt trail, and we need to get on the interstate. I agree with your sentiment of abandoning the medical model now, that time has come, but it’s not as easy to say for the 34 states that have no mj allowances… Our legalization init is lagging in Ohio, and still has all the hoops to get through yet, while the medical init here has jumped through the last hoop and is now collecting the half million signatures needed to get it on the ballot for 2012. I’m still gonna support both efforts, even though I have no qualifying medical condition…
Lory Kohn says:
Oct 25, 2011
Don, thanks for providing those links and sources to the groundbreaking research that has been performed.
You seem to like to write a bit — how’s about writing an article for CC clarifying what research can and can’t be performed on Schedule One drugs in the USA, and perhaps contrasting those regulations with international regulations?
I will admit that there have been benefits that have evolved from the flirtation with MMJ. For example, it has really pushed the envelope in medibles. I’ll be at my “caregiver,” Evergreen Apothecary today, listening to customers’ tales of how medibles have been helping them with their conditions, a variation on the “treat yourself” theme …
air jordan 11 says:
May 27, 2016
I want to say – thank you for this!