[Hemingway's Ghost]

That's not how BigLiquor looks at it...any drop in liquor intake is a drop in their profits and to the extent de-criminalizing the whacky weed decreases that intake, they're gonna be against said legislation (or change in Executive Order).

That may be true, but I don't know to what effect "BigLiquor" controls the lawmaking process in this country.

[Mudboy Slim]

"I don't know to what effect "BigLiquor" controls the lawmaking process in this country."

Money...but I'm not saying they have abso;lute control or anything like that, just that they impact the equation on the side of being pro-WOSD. Why would liquor companies--who make mind-altering substances--be pro-WOSD?! Competition...and competition, in their minds, leads to decreased profits.

Don't you believe that BigAgriculture would try to outlaw backyard gardens if they thought they could get away with it?! Same thing, IMHO...MUD

[headsonpikes]

Although I doubt that one could use vector analysis to predict legislation by analyzing campaign contributions and lobbying expenses, most legislation is the outcome of a contest of financial interests of varying kinds.

All legislation serves private pecuniary interest-- that's an important reason why the state should be kept on a short leash, and excluded from the economy as much as possible.

The drug laws are but a particularly egregious example of the evils of looking to the state for guidance.