Monthly Archives: April 2022

The next leader needs to have it all: red meat for the party base, suburban-friendly ideas and charisma to match Prime Minister Trudeau or whoever follows in his footsteps.

A growing movement of grassroots Conservatives are convinced theyve found their guy in Pierre Poilievre.

He may be young, at just 42, but hes no rookie. The seven-term MP and former Cabinet minister launched his campaign shortly after the party caucus dumped Erin OToole on Groundhog Day, as truckers settled in for the long haul all over downtown Ottawa.

Hes now drawing larger crowds than even Stephen Harper, the partys founding father, managed when he was elected the revamped partys first leader in 2004.

Poilievre is part happy warrior and part angsty firebrand. He preaches freedom to crowds of hundreds, an impressive feat for the early days of a Canadian party leadership campaign, from pulpits in suburban convention centers and rural fairgrounds across Canada.

Hes all about finding and eliminating gatekeepers a swamp of government bureaucrats, politicians and special interests who get in the way of people who want to build things, live the lives they want to live and make something of themselves.

His stump speech isnt subtle. He rails against government overreach, bloated bureaucracies and corrupt politicians. He promises to make Canada the freest country on Earth. He implores everyone within earshot to buy a Conservative membership.

That final appeal is arguably the most important part of any speech he delivers, because members elect leaders and he needs all the support he can get.

Garry Keller, a vice president at StrategyCorp and longtime chief of staff to Poilievre ally and former Cabinet minister John Baird, said the first principle of any leadership campaign is to sell memberships to supporters who will come out to vote both lapsed members and those who are politically homeless but like what they hear.

Poilievre kicks up controversy wherever he goes with blunt rhetoric and policy proposals that would dismantle government bureaucracy. But thats the point. Its not rocket science, but that first principle seems to be lost on a lot of the chattering classes and political commentariat, said Keller.

Winning the leadership on Sept. 10 is only half the battle, of course. Next up is winning the country with the same ideas, or some version of them that wont let down his growing fan base but still win all the swing ridings that can turn an election.

POLITICO recorded a recent Poilievre rally in suburban Ottawa and took it to party strategists and policy wonks to decode.

What he said: There was a lady in New Brunswick who got a phone call that her mother was suddenly on her deathbed in Ontario, but she couldnt get on a plane to fly and see her. And so she had to drive through the freezing rain because of a personal medical decision required because of her own medical history, and risked her life to make it just in time to say goodbye. Ladies and gentlemen, this is no longer about medical science. Justin Trudeaus actions on this have been nothing but political science.

What they heard: This government doesnt want to end Covid, because they want to control you and everyone you love.

Keller remembers it wasnt so long ago that Trudeau openly opposed vaccine mandates.

Early last summer, the prime minister acknowledged that people with allergies, immunocompromised conditions or religious convictions shouldnt be forced to get the shot. More recently, Trudeaus rhetoric lost much of that nuance especially when the trucker convoy trundled toward Ottawa and the prime minister dismissed them as a small fringe minority.

Enter Poilievre, whose crowd in Ottawa ate up his advocacy for truckers who felt attacked by their government. Hes saying he understands the frustration of those Canadians who didnt get vaccinated for whatever reason, said Keller. And he doesnt disrespect them for the choices that they made.

Expert analysis: Poilievre only occasionally distinguishes between vaccine mandates imposed by the federal government and those enforced at the provincial level. When patrons were forced to show proof of vaccination before entering a variety of public places in their day-to-day lives, those were mostly in place thanks to provinces.

The federal government still enforces certain proof of vaccination rules. Anyone who boards an airplane or train in Canada must show a certificate. Anyone entering Canada must also present proof. But the feds are starting to relax rules: fully vaccinated travelers are no longer required to show a negative Covid test at the border.

Poilievre has embraced protesters opposed to a rule imposed at both American and Canadian border crossings that forces non-essential workers, including truckers, to be fully vaccinated. As truckers settled into an occupation of downtown Ottawa streets, Canadas largest trucking company said the border mandates were not an issue at all because most of their drivers were vaccinated.

What he said: In New Brunswick, they are bringing in about 130,000 barrels of overseas oil. Every day in Canada. Thats almost a million barrels a week. Newfoundland, right nearby, is proposing to expand its production by 400,000 barrels a day. In other words, if we can get the regulatory gatekeepers out of the way, the Newfoundlanders could produce enough oil to supply the New Brunswick refineries and then have 200,000 extra barrels leftover to ship off overseas to break the foreign dependence on dictators, to replace dollars for dictators with paychecks for our people.

What they heard: Down with the Liberal regulatory state. Down with Russian oil and gas. Drill, baby, drill.

Whats really going on: Poilievres argument is fodder for supporters of the oil and gas sector, but mismatched timelines and refining processes complicate his proposal.

Atlantic Canada imports overseas oil partly because there are no crude oil pipelines built through Quebec and Ontario to connect the east coast with Alberta, which has more oil than it knows what to do with. Transport by rail is limited which is why the region imports products from overseas.

The Rock wants to double oil output, and high prices are certainly an incentive to do so, but with production forecast to peak in 2032 in Canada, tapering demand doesnt strengthen the long-term business case for more drilling.

When Poilievre proposed 200,000 hypothetical extra barrels to ship overseas to break the foreign dependence on dictators thats more or less the actual plan Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson announced last month.

Both Canada and the United States are upping production to increase the availability of oil to go to international markets to alleviate energy security concerns in European countries keen to wean off Russian oil and gas.

Canadas industry is expected to increase oil and gas production by up to 300,000 barrels per day by the end of the year in response to the global energy crunch provoked by Russias war in Ukraine.

Because Canada doesnt have an export facility, Canadian products need to go through the states to the U.S. Gulf to get to Europe. Any pitches to ship oil from the Rock to Europe also runs against another challenge: Not all refineries on the continent are equipped to process heavy crude, which constitutes half of what Newfoundland and Labrador produces.

What he said: For Justin Trudeau everythings about timing. He picks exactly this moment, when we have 30-year highs for inflation and record-smashing gas prices, to hit Canadians another time with another tax increase. Now lets be clear. Higher gas prices are not a byproduct or an indirect consequence of the carbon tax. They are the purpose the stated purpose of the carbon tax.

What they heard: Those high gas prices youre paying arent a coincidence, or due to global events beyond our control its been Trudeaus plan all along.

Former Conservative leadership candidate Rudy Husny tells POLITICO that Poilievres focus on the carbon tax hits a couple of important notes as he tries to connect with party members.

In one way, Husny said Poilievres vow to scrap the carbon tax demonstrates hes a principled Conservative to members who may have felt betrayed by former leader OTooles climate policy flip-flop. OToole surprised many Conservatives by releasing a carbon-pricing plan after winning a leadership race during which he pledged to kill Trudeaus program.

But Poilievre isnt interested at least for right now in centrist voters who hate the pain at the pump but also worry about climate change. Husny said Poilievres stance draws a clear red line between himself and some of his main rivals who support carbon pricing, like Jean Charest and Patrick Brown.

Poilievre has also been leaning into the tax as a cost of living issue at a time of white-hot inflation.

His goal is really to relate to Canadians, said Husny, who was a senior official in the Harper government. He needs to show that he understands them, he understands their issues and their concerns, and that hes on their side and he has their backs.

Expert analysis: The federal carbon tax has helped lift energy prices in provinces without their own pricing program. But the federal government, which imposes carbon pricing in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario, has moved to offset the costs by distributing a quarterly benefit to households.

Inflation and pump prices are soaring for a number of reasons. The factors include global supply chain bottlenecks and, more recently, the economic fallout from Russias war on Ukraine.

The carbon tax, which is meant to deter consumption, has also played a role.

Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem gave MPs a sense last month of just how much the federal carbon pricing regime has fed into Canadas price growth.

Macklem told members of the finance committee in a letter, which was obtained by Global News, that Januarys inflation reading of 5.1 percent would have been 4.7 percent if the pollution charge had been removed from the prices for gasoline, natural gas and fuel oil.

What he said: Think of this: We have 5.7 percent inflation. If that were to repeat itself for just five years, you would lose almost a third of your paychecks purchasing power. If your boss were to walk up to you and say he was cutting your paycheck by a third, youd say take this job and shove it. But when Justin Trudeau does it to you, he expects you to just shut up and pay out. And thats exactly what they have done.

My government is going to take exactly the opposite direction. We are going to reassert the Bank of Canadas traditional mandate which is to keep inflation low and protect the purchasing power of our money.

What they heard: Ottawa bureaucrats and paper-pushers are stealing your paycheck.

Poilievre is trying to show party members, and Canadians more broadly, that hes fighting for them, Husny said. The goal of any leadership contestants message is to attract new members to the party who will vote for them and to win the support of existing card carriers.

In the process, politicians often face the challenge of taking a complex issue, like inflation or macroeconomics, and presenting it in a way so that everyone understands it, Husny said.

If he speaks like an economist or [at a] really high level by saying, The fiscal policy of this government is not good nobody is going to understand it, as you can imagine, he said. Some people and some economists will maybe say that, obviously, hes taking some shortcuts, and especially in terms of [quantitative easing] and printing money. But its also a very powerful image that people can understand.

Even if some economists accuse Poilievre of oversimplifying the issue, Husny argued it still goes in his favor because he can counter by saying his critics dont understand that most voters paychecks are not worth as much as before.

He can then stress to them that he gets it.

But Husny also cautioned that Poilievre might be better off reserving his critiques for Trudeau, rather than the unelected Bank of Canada governor.

Expert analysis: Poilievres criticisms over the Bank of Canadas policy fixes and Macklem himself have been his go-to lines of attack since 2020.

Hes zeroed in on the central banks large-scale bond purchasing program, which was deployed to protect Canada from Covid-19s economic crisis. Poilievre has tried to label the banks quantitative easing program as a money printing scheme that helped feed Trudeaus record-breaking deficits and price growth.

While government deficits have been known to boost inflation, experts like McGill Universitys Christopher Ragan have argued that the Covid pandemic has been nothing close to normal times.

But Ragan, founding director of the Max Bell School of Public Policy, has warned that the government needs to scale back its spending to avoid stoking any significant price pressures.

What he said: Were going to go with technology instead of taxes. Instead of forcing our provinces to impose a tax on their citizens, were going to incentivize them to enable more environmentally friendly technology, like carbon capture and storage. Were going to export our clean, green energy to the world.

What they heard: Were going to smash the governments heavy-handed restrictions on oil and gas but you can still feel good about green tech, somehow.

A carbon tax burn, a candidates support for Canadas oil and gas sector and a promise to leverage Canadas natural resources to power the world.

Expert analysis: The federal government and Conservatives are mostly on the same page on carbon capture, utilization and storage CCUS deeming the technology necessary to decarbonize the oil and gas sector. The Bloc Qubcois and NDP are on the other side of the argument, viewing the technology as equivalent to a fossil fuel subsidy.

Oil and gas is a significant contributor to Canadas economy, accounting for roughly six percent of gross domestic product. And its a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, too. The sector is responsible for more than a quarter of the countrys total emissions.

Calling CCUS environmentally friendly greenwashes a process used to justify the continued production of oil and gas in a climate emergency and transition era. It gives producers license to produce more when the cost of oil floats around $100 barrels, which is math that bodes well for investors and fossil fuel executives.

Canada, keen to position itself as a climate leader, cant cut off fossil fuels overnight without massive economic disruption. Provinces and territories have jurisdiction over the production and development of natural resources and therein lies the tension with evolving and expanded federal climate policies which some politicians have used to their advantage.

Energy isnt exclusive to oil and gas. Quebec, for example, already exports its clean, green energy to the world. New York City is poised to pay billions for renewable electricity generated by Quebec hydropower via the Champlain Hudson Power Express over the next 25 years.

What he said: The governments now got this new Bill C-11, which will allow the CRTC to regulate what you see, and say, online. They have another bill. They want to ban you from saying anything that the government deems to be harmful. They now want to extend it so that there will be a group of bureaucrats who can cull through all the posts that go online and determine which ones could eventually lead people to think things that they shouldnt think and therefore should be censored for.

What they heard: F-r-e-e-d-o-m.

Shakir Chambers, a principal with Earnscliffe who worked on Doug Fords provincial campaign in 2018, said railing against a perceived government clampdown on free speech is catnip to the crowd. It appeals to the people who want that freedom, who feel that libertarian streak, he said. Less is more, and let me just make my own decisions.

It fits a broader strategy. Poilievre spins every government policy as anti-freedom. Vaccine mandates that fold in truckers? Overreach. The Bank of Canadas pandemic monetary policy? Overreach. Tough rules for pipeline construction and oil exports? Overreach.

The message, said Keller: You dont have a lot of faith in government. I too dont have a lot of faith in government to get things done and build this country.

Expert analysis: The basic goal of Bill C-11 is to update Canadas ancient broadcasting laws for the digital era, and force platforms to incorporate Canadian culture into their offerings.

When he introduced the bill, Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez said it updates the rules so that all broadcasting platforms contribute to our culture. That is all. That is what the bill is all about. But critics say its not that simple.

Michael Geist, the Canada Research Chair in internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa, has raised alarm bells.

Geist has written that the government comms approach seems based primarily on presuming that Canadians wont bother to read the legislation and will therefore take misleading assurances at face value.

Rodriguez insists that digital producers say, YouTubers wont have their content regulated by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission. But Geist says the bill, which is not the Liberals first attempt to update broadcasting rules, does open the door to CRTC regulation of user-generated content.

Poilievres stump speech also references a forthcoming Liberal bill that will attempt to combat online hate. Rodriguez hasnt yet tabled the legislation, which is also a redo after the governments last attempt spawned serious concerns about unintended consequences for freedom of speech in Canada.

An inescapable tension animates every Conservative leadership race. Each candidates popularity with the party base is measured against their future palatability with the rest of the country.

Its not clear Poilievre has the secret sauce to win over Canada. But also, thats not his goal just yet. He needs to win over the Conservatives first.

Some of his promises microtarget subsets of voters. He promises to unleash the power of cryptocurrency in Canada the blockchain capital of the world in his wildest dreams. Crypto bros eat it up, but stumping for alternatives to the loonie might be a tougher sell on the typical Canadian suburbanite.

This race might be Poilievres to lose. His freedom rallies could put him over the top. But the substance behind the rhetoric cant scare off the masses. Otherwise hell just be another loser who cant beat a Liberal.

More:

Decoding the freedom-loving firebrand who wants to be Canada's next PM - POLITICO

SHEBOYGAN - Voters on Tuesdaychose fiveincumbents and fivenew representatives on theSheboygan County board out of 10 contested races.

Members of the 25-person county boardserve a two-year term.

Incumbent election winnersinclude Robert Ziegelbauer in District 12, Christian Ellis in District 18, Jackie Veldman in District 23, William Goehring in District 24 and Roger TeStroete in District 25.

New board members will include Kathleen Donovanin District 3, Suzanne Speltz in District 12, James Coulson in District 13, John Nelson in District 16, former District 18representativeJacob Immel in District 19 and Carl Nonhof in District 20.

This year, 33% of registered voters in the county, about 18,900people, voted in spring elections, a turnout slightly above that of last year (when 27% of registered votersvoted) but well below 2020 (when50% of registered votersvoted).

The Republican Party of Sheboygan County helped several conservative "freedom fighter"candidates campaignfor the county board. Three of the seven candidates Speltz, Coulson and Immelwere elected.

Four candidates, including Speltz, Coulson, Nonhof and Veldman, won by a margin of fewer than 50 votes.

District 3:Incumbent Kathleen Donovan secured 65% of the vote, with 420 votes to Lisa Salgado's 227.

Donovan, 54, moved to Sheboygan in 2014 and was appointed to the county board in December. Donovan'spriorities on the board will include overseeing the implementation of theHealth and Human Services Strategic Plan and retaining county employees, she says.

District 12:Suzanne Speltz narrowly defeated incumbent Robert Ziegelbauer. Speltz secured52.5% of the vote, with 441 votes to Ziegelbauer's 399.

Speltz, 60, is a retired social worker who ran for county board after she saw the negative effects public health emergency orders and mandates had on people's lives, she says. Speltz campaigned on protecting constitutional rights, transparent government and financial independence from grant money with burdensome requirements.

District 13: James Coulson narrowly defeated incumbent Charlette Nennig. Coulson secured 51% of the vote, with 428 votes to Nennig's 411 (a margin of 17 votes).

Coulson, a 45-year-old business owner,campaigned on smaller government, fewer regulations, medical freedom, fiscal responsibility of government and supporting the police.

District 16:John Nelson defeated Kevin Sande, after incumbent Fran Damp did not seek reelection.

Nelson secured 59% of the vote, with 376 votes to Sande's 260.

Nelson, 67, has served on the Plymouth city council since 2013 and has served on several boards including United Way (Plymouth) and Maywood Environmental Park. Nelson campaigned on fiscal responsibility.

District 18:Incumbent Christian Ellis secured 57% of the vote, with 413votes to James Evraets'313.

Christian Ellis, 40, was appointed to the county board in January. He is a lifelong resident of Sheboygan County, a father of four children and works as a corporate recruiter.

District 19:Jacob Immel secured 57% of the vote, with 397votes to Roberta Vollbrecht-Lentz's 295.

Immel, 27, has served on the Sheboygan Falls city council since 2018 and previously served on the county board representing District 18. Important issues Immel will seek to address while on the board include workforce development, economic development, public safety and transparency in government.

District 20:Carl Nonhof narrowly defeated incumbent Brian Hoffmann. Nonhof secured 50.7% of the vote, with 505 votes to Hoffmann's 490.

Nonhof, 70, recently served a term on the Kohler School Board and has a 40-year history of involvement with local groups, he told the Sheboygan Press. Investigatingways to reduce costs for Sheboygan County government and citizens will be a priority for him in office, he says.

District 23: Incumbent Jackie Veldman narrowly defeated Dan Jones.

Veldman secured 50.7% of the vote, with 409 votes to 398 for Jones (a margin of 11 votes).

Veldman, 50, has served on the county board since 2019 and has served six terms on the Town of Mitchell board, including three terms as the town board chairwoman. On the county board, keeping taxes low and expanding access to dependable internet are priority issues for Veldman.

District 24: Incumbent William Goehring secured 76% of the vote, with 559votes to Arush Chahal's 176.

Goehring, 74, has served several years on the county board, including five years as board chairman, has been Town of Sherman board chairman for 35 years andserves on several statewide committees. On the county board, maintaining low taxes will continue to be a priority for Goehring, he says.

District 25: Incumbent Roger TeStroete secured 60% of the vote, with 626votes to David Reichle's 417.

TeStroete, 72, has served several years on the county board, including two terms as board chairman, and has served 12 years on the Town of Holland board. On the county board, maintaining roads will continue to be a priority for TeStroete, he says.

Reach Maya Hilty at 920-400-7485 or MHilty@sheboygan.gannett.com. Follow her on Twitter at @maya_hilty.

See more here:

Voters elect five new faces and five familiar ones to the Sheboygan County Board in the spring general election - Sheboygan Press

The dust has barely settled on the row over halal and jhatka meat in Karnataka that Delhi has jumped in the fray. No, not over the manner of slaughtering, but over the selling of meat itself. The South Delhi Municipal Corporation Mayor sought "closure of meat shops during the nine-days of Navratri festival from April 2 to April 11".

In a letter to the South Delhi Municipal Corporation commissioner dated April 4, Mayor Mukesh Suryan wrote that since devotees of Goddess Durga fast observe fast for nine days during the Navaratri festival with a strict vegetarian diet and abstaining from the use of non-vegetarian food items, the sight of meat being sold in open or near temples makes them uncomfortable. Therefore, meat shops should be closed during the period of Navratri, says Suryan. The period is from April 5 (Tuesday) till April 11.

Suryan has asked the SDMC commissioner to ensure strict adherence to his directives. With nearly 1,500 registered meat shops in SDMCs jurisdiction, this is the first time that the civic body has asked for the closure of meat shops during Navratri.

And with this begins a fresh saga in policing what one eats, how one eats and when one eats. One would have thought that policing the sale and consumption of meat and the kind of meat would be pointless in a country where 80 per cent of people are meat-eaters. A paper published in March 2018 in the Economic and Political Weekly titled 'Provincialising' Vegetarianism, cites data from the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) that puts a figure on the number of Indian meat consumers. The data even offers demographics nearly 59 per cent of Hindus eat meat, besides over 93 per cent of Christians and Muslims, around 21 per cent of Sikhs and over 78 per cent of Buddhists were meat-eaters. Among the Hindus, nearly 35 per cent of Brahmins were meat-eaters as per India Human Development Survey (IHDS).

In fact, India exported processed meat worth over USD 1.7 million in the fiscal year 2021, making it among the largest exporters of meat. Biryani is the most-searched dish on Google and chicken biryani has been consistently topping the charts over the years for being the most ordered dish on online food apps.

Yet, hypocritical moral policing comes as a societal force when it comes to meat-eater shaming. Especially around festivals or religiously significant days. This takes me back to a childhood memory when as a lone South Indian student in a second-grade classroom in Delhi, I would dread opening my lunch box on Tuesdays. Heavens forbid if my mother had packed the (very yummy) kal-dosais for lunch. You see, the dish resembled an omelette to my North Indian classmates (and even some teachers), who would shame me for eating eggs on Tuesday.

It was not the eggs that were a problem, you see. My classmates used to bring boiled eggs on every other day of the week. Except for Tuesdays. On Tuesdays, they were taught, that eating eggs (or any non-vegetarian food) was a sin, and no amount of convincing and pleading that what I was eating was actually fried rice-and-lentil pancakes would make them change their militant stance.

The irony is that I had never tasted an egg until that point, hailing from a staunchly vegetarian family. Nor (at that point, as a seven-year-old) did I know what an omelette looked like. Funnily enough, a Muslim classmate who was a staunch non-vegetarian used to defend me, having tasted my mothers kal-dosais at my home and knowing what they actually were.

Decades thence we dont seem to have progressed an inch from the ignorant bunch of seven-year-olds who found a reason to moral police and shame a vegetarian for eating (what they assumed was) eggs on a religiously significant day. We still find reasons to moral police eating (and selling) meat during Navaratri.

The upholders of gastronomic policing need to be retold what the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court told the Yogi Adityanath government during its crackdown on illegitimate slaughterhouses. Justices Amreshwar Pratap Sahi and Sanjay Harkauli said: To provide an immediate check on the unlawful activity should be simultaneous with facilitating the carrying of lawful activity, particularly that relating to food, food habits and vending thereof that is undisputedly connected with the right to life and livelihood. Food that is conducive to health cannot be treated as a wrong choice.

When he was asked about those who dont observe the festival or the fast, Mayor Suryan said they should respect the sentiments of others. Interestingly, the self-anointed guardians of religious sentiments barely raise a question on whether pork should be banned during Ramzan. Perhaps because of the high(er) incidence of meat-eating among Muslims as compared to the Hindus. Or perhaps because the sensibilities of one religion matter more than that of the other. But then, lets save that absurd debate for another day.

See the article here:

The right to food and the freedom of choice: Should meat be banned during religious festivals? - Times Now

With federal cannabis reform on the table, here's how local sates are spending marijuana taxes

PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) As Washington weighs the risks and rewards of cannabis reform following the House vote to federally legalize marijuana Friday, many lawmakers are looking to states like Oregon and Washington to see how they are already cashing in on cannabis tax revenue.

Last week, the House of Representatives voted to approve the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act, also known as the MORE Act, for the second time in the last two years.

If signed into law, the legislation would expunge former marijuana convictions, reduce current marijuana sentences and remove the drug from the list of scheduled substances under the Controlled Substances Act making the substance legal to consume for adults 21 and over across the U.S.

Although the bill faces an uphill battle in the Senate, it is not the only piece of cannabis reform legislation on the table this month. In February of 2022, the House passed the SAFE Banking act as an amendment to the America COMPETES Act, which would grant legal and legitimate cannabis businesses fair banking access.

Additionally, Bloomberg reported that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer will help back a new marijuana legalization bill, which he plans to introduce this month.

In a joint letter in February, Schumer, Senator Ron Wyden, and Senator Cory Booker called on their Democratic colleagues for further federal cannabis reform, saying, As more and more states move to legalize cannabis for both adult and medical use, the federal government has an important role to play.

This is an issue of individual freedom and basic fairness that clearly transcends party lines, the letter stated. Hundreds of millions of Americans live in states that have legalized cannabis in some form while it remains illegal at the federal level. This discrepancy leads to confusion and uncertainty and raises significant questions around criminal justice reform, economic development and small business growth, and public health and safety, all of which we believe require some type of federal answer.

As the letter pointed out, 18 states have already legalized the use of recreational marijuana and 37 states have legalized the use of medical cannabis since 2010.

The growing number of states legalizing the substance, combined with the newly proposed pieces of legislation signify a fundamental shift in attitude and an increased acceptance regarding use of the cannabis.

As the cannabis debate in Washington continues to drag out, states which have already legalized the substance have begun to profit off their legal marijuana markets and the lucrative taxes placed on the drug.

Furthermore, lawmakers and proponents of national pot reform have said it pays to legalize marijuana quite literally. But just how much money does the government stand to gain by greenlighting weed sales?

To better understand this, KOIN 6 News took a look at how local states are currently cashing in on the controversial crop and how much they are making off cannabis taxes.

The list below outlines how much Oregon and Washington made from marijuana sales tax, in addition to how both states spent those tax dollars last year.

Legalized medical marijuana: November 1998Legalized recreational marijuana: November 2014Retail sales began: October 2015

How Oregon taxes marijuana: Oregon has a 17% state retail tax on all recreational marijuana sales and an additional 3% tax for some Oregon locations

Cannabis Tax Revenue Generated in Oregon: According to the state website, Oregon brought in more than $178 million in total tax revenue from marijuana sales during the 2021 fiscal year.

How Oregon uses cannabis tax revenue: Tax revenue derived from Oregons marijuana sales fund the state programs administrative and enforcement costs, in addition to supporting the Drug Treatment and Recovery Service Fund. According to the state, any remaining revenue is divided to support the following programs:

Legalized medical marijuana: November 1998Legalized recreational marijuana: December 2012Retail sales began: July 2014

How Washington taxes marijuana: Washington State has an excise tax on cannabis sales of 37% as well as a statewide general sales tax of 6.5%, though some local taxes are also enforced.

Cannabis Tax Revenue Generated in Washington: For the 2021 fiscal year, Washington brought in $559.5 million in cannabis tax revenue, an increase of roughly 20% from the 2020 FY revenue.

How Washington uses cannabis tax revenue: According to the state, the bulk of Washingtons cannabis tax revenue is used to fund the states general fund and public health programs. Last year, cannabis revenue in the state helped fund the following:

See the rest here:

Cashing in on cannabis: How Oregon, Washington are using weed tax revenue - KOIN.com

Pathways to permanent housing

California lawmakers are currently considering a handful of bills that aim to improve outcomes for formerly incarcerated people by removing some of the most pressing collateral consequences of criminal convictions rules that keep people from accessing housing, employment, and other necessities.

Reports from the Prison Policy Initiative have revealed troubling statistics of reentry after prison.

One 2018 report showed that, in 2008, approximately 27 percent of formerly incarcerated people were looking for a job, but were still unemployed, a rate higher even than the general U.S. unemployment rate of 24.9 percent during the Great Depression. Yet people who had spent time in prison were also more likely to be actively seeking employment than the general population.

Another national study from PPI showed that formerly incarcerated people were nearly 10 times more likely to be homeless than the general public.

Two bills would widen the pathway to housing for people caught in a cycle of homelessness and incarceration.

The first bill, AB 2383, by Assemblymember Reggie Jones-Sawyer (D-Los Angeles), would prohibit landlords from seeking criminal history information from applicants during the first stage of the housing application process.

Background checks would also only be able to access information from the last seven years.

If a landlord, after conducting a background check during the secondary phase of screening, intended to deny an applicant based on their criminal history, the landlord would also have to provide the applicant with a written explanation for the potential denial within five days.

The potential renter would then have three days to give the landlord a letter either disputing the criminal history information or providing evidence of rehabilitation or other mitigating information. Then, the owner would be required to reconsider the applicant.

These rules do not apply, however, to owners renting out rooms, guest houses, or other housing on property where they the landlords reside.

AB 2383 is backed by the Anti-Recidivism Coalition, the Los Angeles Regional Reentry Partnership, and the Young Womens Freedom Center.

The bill has faced opposition from the California Association of Realtors, who argue that enacting the bill will endanger tenants who live in the complexes and properties formerly incarcerated people are applying to rent.

Yet, a coalition of justice reform groups, including All of Us or None, which seek to increase housing opportunities for formerly incarcerated people, oppose the bill in its current form for far different reasons. These opponents say landlords should be required to offer a conditional offer to an applicant before they can run a criminal background check.

Without a conditional offer, there is no way to prove that the applicant otherwise met the landlords criteria for credit and tenant history, the coalition argued. The advocates also point out that three days is not enough time for rental applicants to come up with rebuttals and supporting documents.

As of April 5, 2022, the bill was before the Assembly Judiciary Committee.

A second bill, AB-1816, from Assms. Isaac Bryan (D-Los Angeles) and Ash Kalra (D-San Jose), seeks to directly address the issues that allow people leaving prison to slip into homelessness.

The bill would create a state-level Reentry Housing and Workforce Development Program. This program would offer five-year renewable grants to counties, continuums of care and community-based organizations to fund evidence-based housing and housing-based services and employment interventions to allow people with recent histories of incarceration to exit homelessness and remain stably housed.

The money would fund long-term rental assistance, landlord incentives, including security deposits and holding fees, and more.

Recent data indicates it costs CDCR nearly $100,000 per inmate per year to incarcerate someone in a California prison, the Assembly Fiscal Committees summary of the bill noted. A chronically homeless person living unsheltered costs tax payers an average of $36,000 per year. The cost to provide permanent supportive housing, affordable housing coupled with services, costs an average of $20,000 per person per year and reduces the risk of recidivism sevenfold.

AB 1816 was revised and sent to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations on March 24, 2022.

Access to expungement

Bills focused on expanding access to criminal record expungement are also moving through the legislative committees.

One notable bill authored by Senator Scott Wiener, SB 1106, would ensure that unpaid restitution debt would not preclude an otherwise eligible person from clearing their record.

A persons poverty should not block them from having their record cleared, said Senator Wiener. Were forcing formerly incarcerated people into a cycle of debt that helps no one. If we want people to actually pay off their restitution debt, they need to be able to access housing and employment.

Wieners bill passed out of the Senate Public Safety Committee on March 24 and is currently on the Senate floor.

Broadening employment opportunities

Several other promising bills would address barriers to employment that keep formerly incarcerated people struggling to find work.

AB 2425, by Assm. Bryan, would provide stipends equivalent to the minimum wage to help formerly incarcerated Californians pay for their basic needs while they work toward obtaining credentials for high road careers in sectors like green-energy, healthcare, construction and infrastructure. Most of these credential programs are full-time, making it difficult for people to participate if they dont have another source of income.

The aptly named Hire UP: From Corrections to Career Pilot Program would be implemented through 10 community college districts throughout the state.

Another bill, AB 1720, would simplify and shorten the process for formerly incarcerated people to earn licenses through the California Department of Social Services allowing them to work in community care facilities.

AB 1720 is currently before the Assembly Committee on Higher Education.

Read more from the original source:

Bills Aim to Open Doors to Housing and Employment for Formerly Incarcerated Californians | - witnessla.com