Mediaboss Marketing

In the early days of the state-level movement to legalize marijuana, we often got opposition from a surprising camp libertarians.

You would think libertarians would be thrilled with laws rolling back cannabis prohibition, but for many, it wasnt enough. Skeptical libertarians found a myriad of reasons to oppose legalization efforts, saying they didnt go far enough.

The movement started in the early 1970s and really started to grow with the legalization of medical marijuana in California way back in 1996. Opponents protested, what about everybody else?

Some libertarians also opposed medical marijuana on principle, saying people shouldnt need a state-issued card to access cannabis. Theyre not wrong theoretically. Asking the government for permission is never desirable. But the fact is virtually all of these people carry a card so they can drive.

As the legalization movement grew and states started allowing recreational marijuana, libertarians often complained about the tax and regulatory schemes attached to cannabis legalization bills and used this as a reason to oppose reforms. Of course, you never heard any of these people arguing that it would be better for alcohol to be illegal rather than heavily taxed and regulated, as it is in most states.

Another common objection was that legalizing marijuana doesnt help people who have already been convicted of marijuana crimes. Having a criminal record has lifelong consequences and millions of people have to go through life with this legal millstone tied around their necks simply because at some point they possessed or sold a plant. What about these people? Again, they would actively oppose legalization bills on this basis.

But think about the implied logic. Were going to allow more people to get caught in this legal web because this bill doesnt address the needs of people already caught in this legal web. Sounds self-defeating, doesnt it?

In reality, all of these are legitimate concerns. These libertarian opponents were generally right about the problems inherent in most legalization schemes. They were good on the philosophy. But opposing legalization efforts because they arent good enough is a bad strategy.

Consider this: would a starving man turn down a slice of bread because it wasnt a whole loaf?

Lets be honest here. Today, were starving for liberty at every turn.

Sometimes you have to take what you get so you have the ability to move forward. If the man gets a slice of bread, hell have the energy to go for that loaf.

The same principle applies to legislative activism. Small steps forward often lead to more steps forward.

Thomas Jefferson understood this well. In fact, in a 1790 letter to the Rev. Charles Clay Jefferson said liberty is to be gained by inches.

The ground of liberty is to be gained by inches that we must be contented to secure what we can get from time to time, and eternally press forward for what is yet to get. It takes time to persuade men to do even what is for their own good. [Emphasis added]

Consider the issue of past marijuana convictions. Its true that in the early days of the cannabis legalization movement, this was rarely addressed. But today, most proposed legalization measures include provisions to expunge past convictions. As just one example, Between July and September 2021, New Jersey courts dismissed or vacated an estimated 362,000 marijuana cases. But if those early efforts had failed because they werent good enough, we would have never gotten to this place.

Heres the strategic reality: once a state legalizes marijuana even if only in a very limited way the law tends to eventually expand, often times because good people are pointing out how the first step isnt good enough.

As the state tears down some barriers, markets develop and demand expands. That creates pressure to further relax state law. Ive seen this over and over again. States that initially ban home marijuana cultivation often relax laws to allow it down the road. Limits on production get raised. Expungement provisions get passed.

But you have to take the first step before you can take the second.

Jefferson understood this too. In a letter to James Madison on Nov. 17, 1798 the day after his Kentucky Resolutions opposing the Alien and Sedition Acts were passed he wrote:

"I inclose you a copy of the draught of the Kentucky resolves. I think we should distinctly affirm all the important principles they contain, so as to hold to that ground in future, and leave the matter in such a train as that we may not be committed absolutely to push the matter to extremities, & yet may be free to push as far as events will render prudent."

Its important not to allow the perfect to become the enemy of good when it comes to political activism. Opposing decent or even mediocre bills can slam the door on broader reforms in the future.

Thomas Jefferson was right. To advance liberty in the face of the largest government in history, we have to use smart strategy.

Take what we can get by pushing as far as events will render prudent, and then eternally press forward for more.

Michael Maharrey is communications director of the Tenth Amendment Center, managing editor of the SchiffGold blog, and founder of GodArchy.org. This article was republished from tenthamendmentcenter.com.

Go here to see the original:
OPINION: Step by Step for Liberty: Cannabis Edition - The Richmond Observer