←back to thread

US drug control agency will move to reclassify marijuana

(apnews.com)
662 points JacobHenner | 10 comments | 30 Apr 24 17:32 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
paxys ◴[30 Apr 24 18:27 UTC] No.40214410[source]▶
On one hand I'm very happy with all the recent policy changes coming down from different federal agencies, but on the other there's a very high likelihood that they will all be reversed a few months from now if/when a new administration takes over. That is always the downside of executive rule. With Congress unwilling/incapable of acting though I guess this is the best we'll get.
replies(5): >>40214437 #>>40214495 #>>40214631 #>>40214636 #>>40215141 #
colpabar ◴[30 Apr 24 18:34 UTC] No.40214495[source]▶
What bothers me is that all these things are only happening because it's an election year and the incumbent doesn't have great polling numbers.
replies(5): >>40214539 #>>40214638 #>>40215135 #>>40215913 #>>40216274 #
1. paxys ◴[30 Apr 24 18:37 UTC] No.40214539[source]▶
Well, politicians doing what people want in order to get reelected is kinda the point of democracy.
replies(4): >>40215270 #>>40215375 #>>40216745 #>>40217372 #
2. colpabar ◴[30 Apr 24 19:34 UTC] No.40215270[source]▶
There's no need to talk down to me.

My point was that they could be doing what people want for the entire duration of their term, rather than in the last few months. To use an analogy, it's like a student getting bad grades all year and then doing a bunch of extra credit assignments when they're worried about failing the class.

replies(2): >>40215359 #>>40217771 #
3. infamouscow ◴[30 Apr 24 19:40 UTC] No.40215359[source]▶
Your chief complaint is not new, it's nearly as old as democracy itself.

Different forms of democracy have various trade-offs, what your describing is the trade-off of representative democracy.

replies(1): >>40216125 #
4. vuln ◴[30 Apr 24 19:41 UTC] No.40215375[source]▶
They only dangle the carrot when they need something, ie reelection.
5. hughesjj ◴[30 Apr 24 20:45 UTC] No.40216125{3}[source]▶
Is also partly the fault of voters for being so darn susceptible to recency bias. Do a lot of good at the start and then reach a lull and everyone's gonna hate. Timing can and has cost elections.
6. dgunay ◴[30 Apr 24 21:44 UTC] No.40216745[source]▶
Yeah, but based on the guiding principle of democracy (govt by the will of the people), you'd hope to see them do that immediately instead of waiting years and years to do it when it is most strategically advantageous. I know politics is gamey like that by nature, but it sucks to see. The lag time between a policy becoming overwhelmingly popular and it actually being implemented is often long enough to radically alter the course of millions of peoples' lives.
replies(2): >>40220981 #>>40222087 #
7. paulddraper ◴[30 Apr 24 22:45 UTC] No.40217372[source]▶
Yeah, if only every year were election year....
8. astrange ◴[30 Apr 24 23:35 UTC] No.40217771[source]▶
They've been working on this for two years, it was announced they'd do it in 2022.
9. yurishimo ◴[01 May 24 08:56 UTC] No.40220981[source]▶
While this is true, I'm not going to look a gift horse in the mouth. At some point, we decided as a nation to only care about politics during election years. Participation rates for local elections is near an all time low. If people were more involved with the process, I would imagine that we would see more movement in Congress as a reaction to the will of the people.
10. paxys ◴[01 May 24 12:05 UTC] No.40222087[source]▶
If doing it at the end of his term gets him more votes than the beginning, that means the voters want to see it done towards the end.