3 more....WTF? What does the DEA have to do with what CA is doing? This is about state and local govt expanding, not getting smaller.
So Vitter has stated that he would not necessarily be opposed to medical pot, but does not support recreational weed. What about Angelle, Dardenne, and John Edwards?
Oh wait so now state government is big government. I was talking about federal, you know the bad kind, not the wonderful do no wrong state government you pubs like so much. Legalize pot, decrease funding to the DEA, federal government shrinks.
I'm all about state's rights. But that's not the issue here. CA is increasing the size of government to ensure they get their money. They are bringing the laborious, tedious, bureaucratic nightmare of business licensing and procedure in CA to pot growers. Businesses in this state, particularly the size of most pot growers, are leaving in droves because it's just too damn hard to make it. You have to apply for too many licenses, pay for each one, register with too many agencies, pay for each one, and then spend money to make sure you don't violate any laws or policies....because if you do violate? You WILL pay.
To be a big government it doesn't matter whether it's a state, municipality or national government. If it is intrusive and inhibits people with regulations and micro management then it's big. California is the mother of big government in the U.S. You're dreaming if you think legalized pot will reduce government. BTW I'm for legalization for both medical and personal use.
It should reduce the DEA's budget significantly, and they will have to get rid of workers because that's what lazy people with no brains do, they cut labor.
Nah they'd just be transferred to the FDA or Agriculture where they can put their experience to use. Seriously you of all people should know how hard it is to get rid of a civil servant.
