this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2023
539 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19096 readers
5318 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Silverseren@kbin.social 187 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"Newsom, a Democrat who championed legalizing cannabis in 2016, said in a statement Saturday that more needs to be done before California decriminalizes the hallucinogens.

“California should immediately begin work to set up regulated treatment guidelines - replete with dosing information, therapeutic guidelines, rules to prevent against exploitation during guided treatments, and medical clearance of no underlying psychoses,” Newsom’s statement said. “Unfortunately, this bill would decriminalize possession prior to these guidelines going into place, and I cannot sign it.”"

At least there's an attempt to have a reasonable explanation.

[–] Anamnesis@lemmy.world 134 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The whole premise of this veto is that the infrastructure isn't set up for mushrooms to be used as a safe medicine. Which completely ignores the fact that most people who use mushrooms do so recreationally; who gives a shit if it can or can't be used by the medical system? That would be great, but it has no bearing on whether mushrooms should be legalized.

[–] ofcourse@lemmy.ml 76 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If CA decriminalizes it, everyone would be looking toward the state to see its success or failure. Opponents would try to find any excuse to shut it down whether in CA or other states. So if we can set up guidelines and necessary infrastructure for safe use, both medically and recreationally, it would be better for long term success of psylocybin legalization.

[–] scottywh@lemmy.world 57 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Already legal in Colorado.

[–] MentallyExhausted@reddthat.com 28 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Oregon too, as I understand it.

[–] scottywh@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

I believe you are correct that they are similarly decriminalized in Oregon although the particulars do differ a bit as I understand it.

[–] Vyvanse@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Oregon started issuing licenses to treatment facilities this year. It took a few years to get the infrastructure in place and to get professional therapists trained, but facilities are now opening up for treatment.

[–] Not_mikey@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

And in California, just parts of it. Oakland has outright decriminalization and you can go to smoke shops and buy chocolates. It's still technically illegal in San Francisco, but every large event, or even day in the park, there's some guy walking around openly selling mushrooms and joints.

[–] Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Success or failure? It is already been and has been consumed by millions of people for thousands of years. Seems like it is a success to me.

[–] tomi000@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The reason it is even considered to be legalized is the medical use in the first place, not people partying on shrooms. So I donno what youre on about.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (10 children)

It should be legalized because making a fungus illegal is fucking stupid.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

It was fine before people made it illegal.

Was used for centuries.

[–] time_lord@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I asked Bing's chatbot who was against the bill (who funded "The California Coalition for Psychedelic Safety and Education"), and this is what it told me.

The California Coalition for Psychedelic Safety and Education does not disclose its sources of funding on its website1. However, some of its members have been involved in other anti-drug campaigns, such as the Drug Free America Foundation and the Partnership for Drug-Free Kids2. These groups have received funding from various sources, including pharmaceutical companies, private foundations, and government agencies2. It is possible that the coalition receives some of its funding from similar sources, but this is not confirmed. The coalition claims to be a grassroots organization of concerned citizens who want to protect public health and safety1.

[–] Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago

Did you then go and check all of those facts to make sure the AI wasn't ~~lying~~ "hallucinating" to you?

[–] 30mag@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

That'd be a better answer if you couldn't go buy a gallon of cough syrup with dextromethorphan in it without a prescription.

[–] annoyedcamel@reddthat.com 173 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Boo. Everyone boo this man.

[–] navi@lemmy.tespia.org 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

HAVE YOU SUCKED DICK FOR COKE???

[–] DigitalTraveler42@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

RIP Bob Saget

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 70 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So progressive! /s

Pisses me off. It's California! C'mon!

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 53 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Is California not the state of “progressive oh wait not so far let’s walk it back”? That’s how you’re seen by the east coast progressives at least. It’s like how New York is exactly as progressive as Wall Street permits it to be

[–] sik0fewl@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

California is always like the tenth state to do something progressive, not the first.

[–] sosayethme@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Based on what examples? California was literally the first state to legalize medical cannabis.

California established the first auto-emission standards in the U.S. in 1966.

In 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have the right to marry. Although the controversial Proposition 8 temporarily halted this later the same year, the precedent had been set, and it was one of the first states to legally recognize same-sex marriage.

The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) of 2018 was one of the first comprehensive data privacy laws in the U.S.

California has been at the forefront of raising the minimum wage, aiming for $15 an hour before many other states.

Newsom punted and he shouldn't have, but your comment is nonsense.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

True. It just pats itself on the back like Michigan, Washington, and Colorado didn’t beat it to the punch

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] oyo@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Newsom dialing back the progressivism for his presidential run.

[–] capital@lemmy.world 60 points 1 year ago

California registered voters,

Consider signing this petition. This group needs help getting funding to use psychedelics to treat mental health. They need 1 million signatures and it must be done via wet signatures.

Read up at this link and if it sounds like something you support, please sign.

https://www.treatcalifornia.org/

[–] eighthourlunch@kbin.social 57 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sounds like the pharmaceutical companies are still investing in governments.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 5 points 1 year ago

This just Newsom wanting to keep his chances for a future Presidential bid alive. Don't want to see attack ads about him being on shrooms.

[–] Not_mikey@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago

While it remains illegal on the state and national level, some cities in California have already decriminalized. San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley and Santa Cruz. Come take your next trip in the Bay area!

[–] gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 34 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Signs a few good things, vetoes a few good things

Why can't we just get a solidly good governor for a while and not one that oscillates between "ok enough" and "frustrating"

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

At least there are periods of "ok enough". We're stuck with Eric Adams the landlord cop in NYC

[–] joystick@lemmy.world 31 points 1 year ago

Newsom supporting the war on drugs. 🤢

[–] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago

Gavin Newsom failed America by vetoing that bill.

[–] ThatHermanoGuy@midwest.social 24 points 1 year ago

Damn, he's just been vetoing everything lately. Gotta love that race toward the centre.

[–] spider@lemmy.nz 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Newsom's "centrist" tribute to the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein.

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago
[–] RozhkiNozhki@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

"Advocates are attempting to place two initiatives to expand psychedelic use on the November 2024 ballot. One would legalize the use and sale of mushrooms for people 21 and older"

FYI that's Decriminalize California and their signature collection campaign is in full swing. https://decrimca.org/

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Letting perfect be the enemy of good... again.

Gavin Newsom, corporate whore, wannabe esq

[–] sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago
[–] pissclumps@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Just grow them yourself it's easy enough

[–] GrabtharsHammer@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah yeah, we know. It’s also illegal, which means there are real nasty consequences for getting caught with them. Decriminalizing them would have reduced those real nasty consequences and made it much simpler to grow and possess your own.

Somebody fixing up their PTSD doesn’t need the fuzz coming down on them, regardless of how easy it is to grow the treatment.

Neither does someone who just wants to trip balls because that’s what they want to do this weekend.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The Federal Drug Administration designated psilocybin as a “breakthrough therapy” for treatment-resistant depression in 2019 and recently published a draft guideline on using psychedelics in clinical trials.

“Psilocybin gave me my life back,” Joe McKay, a retired New York City firefighter who responded to the 9/11 attacks, said at an Assembly hearing in July.

“We’re grateful that Governor Newsom listened to some of the top medical experts, psychedelic researchers and psychiatrists in the country who all warned that legalization without guardrails was at best premature for both personal and therapeutic use,” the coalition said in a statement Saturday.

“This is a setback for the huge number of Californians — including combat veterans and first responders — who are safely using and benefiting from these non-addictive substances and who will now continue to be classified as criminals under California law,” Wiener said in a statement Saturday.

Two years later, Colorado voters also passed a ballot measure to decriminalize psychedelic mushrooms and to create state-regulated centers where participants can experience the drug under supervision.

One would legalize the use and sale of mushrooms for people 21 and older, and the other would ask voters to approve borrowing $5 billion to establish a state agency tasked with researching psychedelic therapies.


The original article contains 789 words, the summary contains 207 words. Saved 74%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›