A subtle but perceptible shift in the United States’ political orientation took place in November measurable by the success of several ballot proposals from states as far apart as Maine and Colorado. Here and in Washington, voters approved constitutional amendments for the legalisation of recreational marijuana for the first time in the country’s history.

1. Nick Graham, Haliford School
Propositions in
2012 – a shift
leftwards?
A subtle but perceptible shift in the
Voters appeared to offer two reasons for granting pot its legalisation.
United States’ political orientation took
Aside from the obvious fact that many people enjoy using it, the
place in November measurable by the economic argument reminiscent of the rationale given to end
success of several ballot proposals Prohibition in the 1930s that it would generate much needed
from states as far apart as Maine and revenue streams convinced a great number of people from across
Colorado. Here and in Washington, voters the political spectrum. The economic climate and the fact that many
approved constitutional amendments state governments are struggling to pay their public service employees
convinced many that the drug should be legalised, ironically in order
for the legalisation of recreational
to aid investment and improvements in schools. In doing so it
marijuana for the first time in the brought fiscal hawks and tie-dye clothed hippies together in common
country’s history. cause. However, in doing so, Washington and Colorado are now in
direct conflict with federal law that continues to classify the drug
Four more states, adding to the five that had already done so and as a schedule 1 controlled substance. Pro-legalisation groups will
Washington DC, voted to either maintain the legal status of or legalise however be buoyed by the fact that the federal government has yet
same sex marriage. Like in Colorado and Washington, these victories to directly challenge the legality of the new statutes.
were thanks mainly to the effort, donations and organisation of issue
advocacy groups from across the country. The Marijuana Policy Project, Nine states and Washington D.C. have now voted to legalise same
backed by George Soros, was the leading donor of the Colorado sex marriage and encouraged by their success in 2012, advocates
initiative whilst in Washington, donors ranging from Bill Gates to have turned their attention to a handful of other states where they
Mayor Bloomberg of New York donated funds to help pass amendments see potential to put gay rights amendments onto the statute books.
legalising same sex marriage. Demographics suggests that time, as well as money, are on their side.

2. Nick Graham, Haliford School
Propositions in
2012 – a shift
leftwards?
(continued)
Acceptance of same sex marriage is far more commonplace amongst not to implement President Obama’s healthcare law, although this is
younger voters than it is amongst an elderly generation whose unlikely to survive the courts. The campaigns to legalise both same
numbers will continue to decrease with the passage of time. A very sex marriage and marijuana were probably benefitted by the distraction
astute marketing campaign hit the airwaves in Maine, Washington, of a presidential election that may have diverted the attention of the
Maryland and Minnesota, presenting the case as one affecting nor- right from causes that groups such as the National Organisation for
mal people, in some cases using firemen as spokespersons as to why Marriage had successfully defeated at state ballot boxes in previous
gays should have the same rights as others. The gains made contrast elections. In 2006 for example, a measure to legalise marijuana was
starkly with 2004 when a series of anti-gay rights measures were defeated in Colorado, the very same state that in 2012 approved one
passed via propositions in several states. 2012 may well be seen as identical to it. Liberal America may well see 2012 as pivotal in its
pivotal in marking a decisive shift in attitudes towards gay rights struggle for civil rights. However, it should note the Tea Party’s rise in
amongst society’s mainstream. It may even now go beyond partisanship 2008 following another landmark year for progressivism in America
as a growing number of Republicans including Dick Cheney add their and the possibility of another conservative backlash, before becoming
support to the cause. The next goal is surely the lobbying of the complacent and assured as far as the future political direction goes.
Supreme Court to test the constitutionality of the Defence of
Marriage Act which raises the possibility of it striking down a federal
law that restricts marriage to that between a man and a woman.
The parallel can be seen between the tactics employed by the
proponents of these causes who see them as rights-based issues
and the movement to force a Prohibition amendment into the
constitution and a federal law onto the statute book in the early part
of the last century. By targeting state legislatures, advocacy groups
of both the right and the left hope to create the conditions whereby
at the federal level, issues cannot be ignored and legislators there
will follow on from localised trends. With regard to marijuana,
much groundwork had already been laid and has been added to by
Massachusetts’ vote to legalise medicinal marijuana, bringing to a
total of 18 the number of states that have now done so. In this way,
policies are effectively trialled and states can act as the incubators
for federal laws that are later introduced nationwide.
There is however a danger of reading too much into the results of
these propositions. Oregon, a state with strong liberal leanings, voted
down a ballot proposal to legalise recreational marijuana. Whilst
voters became tolerant on social issues, clear statements were made
as regards union rights in Georgia and voters in four states pledged
Questions
What are the advantages of federalism? Use the article
and your own knowledge or research.
What factors explain the success of measures to legalise
gay marriage and marijuana in 2012?
Who do propositions benefit more, the individual or
the special interest?