This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/dc-council-eliminates-jail-time-for-marijuana-possession-stepping-to-national-forefront/2014/03/04/df6fd98c-a32b-11e3-a5fa-55f0c77bf39c_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
D.C. Council votes to eliminate jail time for marijuana possession D.C. Council votes to eliminate jail time for marijuana possession
(about 5 hours later)
Consuming marijuana in a private home will no longer be a criminal offense in the nation’s capital under a measure that passed the D.C. Council on Tuesday and that instantly escalated a simmering national debate over loosening marijuana laws. Possessing marijuana and smoking it in the privacy of one’s home would no longer be criminal offenses in the nation’s capital under a bill passed Tuesday by the D.C. Council, putting the District at the forefront of a simmering national debate over decriminalization.
Mayor Vincent C. Gray (D) intends to sign the measure, a spokesman said, putting District drug law in conflict with federal law. The signed measure will go to Congress, which has veto authority over D.C. laws but has organized to override only three times since 1979. Mayor Vincent C. Gray (D) intends to sign the bill, which would partially decriminalize pot by swapping civil fines for jail time for most offenses. The District joins 17 states that have taken similar action but doesn’t go as far as Colorado or Washington state, where voters have legalized the sale and taxation of marijuana.
National advocates for marijuana legalization celebrated the 10 to 1 vote by the D.C. Council, expressing confidence that a divided Congress would fail to act to upend it, and more importantly, that the vote might reflect growing mainstream support for recreational use of the drug. The District also stopped short of legalizing public smoking — a decision influenced by the input of police officials, parents and others who remain unconvinced that full decriminalization is a good step for the city.
Under the bill, D.C. would not go as far as Colorado and Washington state, where voters have legalized the sale and use of marijuana. Instead, the measure would put the District at the forefront of 17 states that have taken the partial measure to decriminalized marijuana, eliminating jail time for most offenses in favor of civil fines. The District’s unique rules of governance require the bill to sit before a congressional panel for 60 days before it becomes law, but several advocates said they don’t expect federal lawmakers to intervene. More broadly, advocates celebrated the 10 to 1 council vote as the latest reflection of growing mainstream support for recreational marijuana use. Their cheers were muted only by concerns that the council didn’t go far enough to reverse the city’s history of disproportionately arresting African Americans on drug charges.
In D.C., the fine for possession of up to one ounce of marijuana would be $25, a penalty smaller than found in any state other than Alaska. The bill would also equate smoking marijuana in public to toting an open can of beer; a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of $500 and up to six months in jail. “D.C. will serve as a model for jurisdictions where, for one reason or another, full taxation and legalization is not yet possible,” said Ethan Nadelmann, founder and executive director of the pro-legalization Drug Policy Alliance. The landmark vote, he said, will leapfrog the District ahead of even California and Massachusetts, which have passed more legally complicated decriminalization measures in recent years.
“We are taking a significant step to correct the continuing social injustice caused by a failed war on drugs,” said Council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6), the lead author of the bill. By playing out in the nation’s capital, the drama highlights the persistent conflict that decriminalization creates with federal law. It remains unclear how overlapping local and federal jurisdictions will affect enforcement, particularly in national parks. Someone could be arrested under federal law, for instance, for possession on the Mall.
Critics say that decriminalizing possession of marijuana — while leaving the act of smoking the drug a crime — will keep alive concerns about racial profiling in marijuana arrests. Elsewhere in the city, the penalty for possession of up to an ounce would drop to a fine of $25 — smaller than in any state except Alaska. If caught, consumption in private residences would draw the same fine, unless in public housing, which is governed by federal law. The bill would equate smoking marijuana in public to toting an open can of beer; a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of $500 and up to six months in jail, down from a potential $1,000 fine and one-year jail sentence.
It also will add gray areas in policing: D.C. officers would not be able to arrest someone due to the smell of marijuana: they would have to see the smoke. And being marijuana-impaired in public would not be a crime equal to public intoxication — unless it occurs behind the wheel. Across the country, decriminalization efforts have been promoted primarily as an expansion of civil liberties meant to frame recreational pot use as a personal choice with few societal consequences and little need for government oversight.
“It’s what I’d call the growing pains” of inching toward legalization, said Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D), who led the charge against a broader measure to eliminate all criminal penalties, saying he did not want his daughter to encounter people smoking marijuana on city streets. But in the District, the movement has been framed as a civil rights issue, particularly in the past year, after a series of reports detailed greater racial disparity in drug arrests here than in most major U.S. cities.
Advocates for the bill say it is still a strong measure that builds on similar laws passed in California and Massachusetts. For one, the D.C. bill would protect people who share marijuana from being prosecuted as dealers. “In D.C., there are more than 5,000 arrests per year for marijuana; 90 percent are African American,” said council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6), the lead author of the bill. “One drug charge can change a life forever. Our action . . . does not repeal all negative impacts caused by criminalization of marijuana, but it moves us in the right direction.”
The bill would also preclude D.C. police from charging people with possession or dealing if they simultaneously possess large amounts of cash and several bags of marijuana. Some advocates say that poorer residents are often paid for their work in cash and buy the drug in small amounts multiple times on their payday. Council member Marion Barry (D-Ward 8), who continued to recuperate from a recent illness in an inpatient rehabilitation center, did not vote. But in a phone interview, Barry praised the outcome. “This is a great day for Washington, for young black men who have been caught up in the criminal justice system for a bag of marijuana,” he said.
Given the District’s overlapping web of local and federal law enforcement, it’s unclear whether federal agencies will agree. The District drug law would conflict with federal ones, and little is known about how federal agencies in the city would respond when they see people abiding by the District measure but violating federal statute. Once signed, the bill must go to Congress, which will have 60 legislative days to reject it. That would take an act of both the House and the Senate, an outcome that has happened only three times since 1979.
It would be legal under the District bill, for instance, to carry up to an ounce of marijuana split into dozens of bags, the drug paraphernalia to smoke it and an unlimited amount of cash. But under federal law, those conditions could be used to charge someone with possession with intent to distribute, potentially drawing years in prison and other steep penalties. If congressional opponents of looser drug laws are set on blocking the measure, it is more likely that they would seek to undermine it through the District’s annual congressional budget review. Congress repeatedly used riders to District funding bills to suspend a voter-approved medical marijuana program from 1998 to 2010, when it was finally able to proceed.
Under President Obama, the Justice Department has not sought a confrontation with states, including Colorado and Washington, where voters have legalized recreational use of marijuana. Historically, the agency also has not devoted resources to prosecuting individuals for drug possession. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), chairman of the House committee that has jurisdiction over many District affairs, declined to comment through a spokesman.
Federal officers in the District do make arrests. Last year, the U.S. Park Police, which has jurisdiction over the Mall and nearly every park and traffic circle in the city, recorded 501 “incidents” involving marijuana. But Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), the city’s nonvoting member of Congress, said she does not expect her colleagues to “interfere.” If they do, she said, “I will stoutly defend D.C.’s right to pass such legislation, just as 17 states have already done.”
Park Police spokeswoman Lelani Woods said that since the D.C. measure has not been enacted, the agency has not formed a response. However, she said “there is nothing to suggest that this is going to be our standard,” Woods said. Implementing and enforcing the measure promises to be an ongoing challenge. How the law is interpreted by federal agents in the city could depend largely on who is president.
The measure passed a first vote in the council last month with only one dissenting vote. In recent days, a majority of council members said in interviews that they would support the bill in a final vote. The only remaining question appears to be whether Council member Vincent B. Orange (D-At Large) will succeed in adding a provision to outlaw drug testing by D.C. employers. Under President Obama, the Justice Department has not sought a confrontation with states that have legalized or decriminalized marijuana. But more than two dozen federal law enforcement agencies operate in the District, and some routinely make traffic stops and arrests.
Orange argued that more poor residents will smoke but end up being discriminated against for jobs because they will fail drug tests. Last year, U.S. Park Police, which have jurisdiction over the Mall and nearly every park and traffic circle, recorded 501 “incidents” involving marijuana. The agency has not yet formed a response to the D.C. measure, but a Park Police spokeswoman said there is “nothing to suggest” the agency would follow the city’s lead.
With or without the amendment, the measure would face a 60-day review period by Congress. Not all city leaders view full decriminalization as good for the city or, in particular, for its African American population. Council President Phil Mendelson (D) led the effort to stop short of allowing public smoking, capturing a prevalent sentiment among parents when he said he didn’t want his daughter sitting next to people getting high in public.
Wells said he is confident that the measure will become law. “Society says you can’t drink in public. I’m sure the public will feel that way in short order with regard to public smoking of marijuana,” Mendelson said. “It’s one thing to talk about treating the substance like we do alcohol; another to talk about how we treat the behavior.”
“I think that even a conservative Congress would leave this alone. An incredible waste of government resources goes into the criminalization of marijuana” by police, courts and jails, Wells said. “And it’s law that creates more public harm than public good.” The lone dissenter Tuesday was council member Yvette M. Alexander (D-Ward 7), who said that the half-measure was poorly crafted and that the council should either keep it illegal or fully allow it.
“There will not be any reduction in the amount of arrests because . . . there will still be arrests when someone is smoking marijuana on the corner, or when someone is selling marijuana on the corner,” Alexander said. “If you’re the lucky one who happens to possess it, then you’re off the hook.”
Council member Vincent B. Orange (D-At large) voted ”present,” protesting a failed amendment to ban drug testing by D.C. employers.
Council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) warned that the city should prepare to deal with the fallout of addictions from increased use and mount a public service campaign like it does against underage use of alcohol to warn children of the dangers
“This is not saying we’re decriminalizing a harmless substance . . . when abused it is harmful,” Graham said. “But we know also the effects and consequences of being arrested, especially if you are a young person, are indeed harmful.”
D.C. voters could have an opportunity this year to weigh in. A band of marijuana activists in the District are awaiting final word from the D.C. Board of Elections on whether they can proceed with gathering signatures for a November ballot measure to authorize full legalization of marijuana in the city.
The elections board could decide as early as Wednesday on the measure, which would allow people 21 or older to possess as much as two ounces of marijuana for personal use and grow up to three plants at home. It would also allow marijuana growers to transfer, but not sell, small amounts to others, as well as legalize the sale of bowls, bongs and other cannabis paraphernalia.