42% of states have legalized recreational use.
Legalization lags public sentiment but not hugely, especially if like you alluded to, weighting by voter participation.
Politicians will take easy wins all day long.
If the popular consensus is that this is something that should be left up to the states, then federal legislation to that effect should be passed. The status quo is clearly farcical.
That said, my state has technically issued licenses for exactly two (2) dispensaries, and yet there's one on every corner. All of which accept card. So I have my doubts as to whether this is anything other than CYA by Mastercard.
I don't think this is nearly as bad as everyone internalizes. Voting by age (with weed positions at the side by full/med only/illegal) is
- 51% for 18-24 (72/20/7 age 18-29)
- 63% for 25-44 (62/26/10 age 30-49)
- 71% for 45-64 (54/34/11 age 50-64)
- 76% for 65-74 (53/34/10)
- 72% for 75+ (30/51/16)
There is a correlation, but literally only one group has a <50%, and it is still 81% for medical. There's still a HUGE disalignment no mater what age demographic we're discussing. It's not old people, it is old people who are in politics.
Edit: forgot to cite the census other numbers are from the same pew above
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/2020-pre...
Do they keep all the people who are in the system because of something related to weed in, or do you let them go? Do they assume culpability for fines, imprisonment, damages, defamation...
I'd say it seems to be in the best interest of the ruling class to orchestrate a slow deflation. States legalize it against the will of the federal government, this gets people out of the system for related charges. After some critical mass they homologate it with alcohol/tobacco and there's no catastrophic secondary motion. In the linked maps, many of the areas with the highest drug use, which I assume predicts potsmoking rates, also so happen to be the ones which have elected to legalize in some capacity. Whether that stands up to statistical tests of significance is another matter...
Anyways, these policies were put into action by the federal government, repealing them may appear to be an admission of fault - and fault that appearing increasingly to have retarded important research on a number of candidates for a variety of therapies while also crushing countless thousands of lives for behaviors that are, I (and I think many others) would argue, fundamental to humans.
It's interesting to look at some maps:
US Population Map:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Population_by_U.S._s...
Map of Cannabis Status:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_US_state_cann...
Maps of Drug Statistics:
https://www.pewtrusts.org/-/media/post-launch-images/2018/03...
Easy, you let them go. You shouldn't be in jail for something that is legal. Now, if there's more to the crime than possession (and honestly I don't personally care about distribution), then that's a different story. But that different story needs to include something that is illegal with current laws.
Personally I think it makes it tantamount to false imprisonment and a miscarriage of justice, and blatantly admitting to fault with no reluctance whatsoever.
Not to mention in any cases where it the crime was registered as - felonious we're talking the restoration of rights to these folks.
But then there's damages. I was refused an entry level job at a convenience store over possession/consumption charges which at the time had occurred 4 years prior. Those were misdemeanor charges. How many people have had their balls busted over "trafficking of a controlled substance" because they were on an interstate, wound up with a felony charge, probation, prison/jail time, and a record that haunted them for years. I went straight because I had a decent job laid in my lap that turned a blind eye to my record - a lot of people in a lot of places won't have that opportunity.
And if they acknowledge that, then they'll also have to acknowledge that they were also reasonably at fault for poor outcomes which proceeded from their intervention. You go into the College of Criminals with an AS in potsmoking and graduate with a PhD in dealing meth and an MS in criminal violence - no surprise the recidivism rate is so high.
That's something each state will have to decide the Feds (Biden) have already allowed you to be pardoned [1] but a Presidential Pardon only applies to federal crimes so if a state convicted you (quite common!) then it does nothing.
By default, if an action you did was illegal at the time of performance & conviction then you'll remain in prison if the action becomes legal later on and won't be a valid basis of appeal. Your only hope is for a pardon.
[1]: https://www.justice.gov/pardon/presidential-proclamation-mar...
Assuming age ranges have the same size, according to your #s, the electorate is 53% in favor recreational, 34% in favor of medical only.
Jurisdiction legality across the US population is 48% recreational [1] and 28% medical only [2].
And those numbers are trending up rapidly. Ten years ago, recreational legalization was literally zero.
Democracy is basically working, for better or worse.
[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/13/facts-abo...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis_in_the_United... 76% of states have medical marijuana...but I didn't do the population math.
So 76% approval. Seems like more than ample popularity for the fed to at minimum let the states handle it. I mean states, and even counties handle alcohol.
Once feds get power over something, it's very difficult to get it away.
The trouble with payment processing isn't equivalent to legality. See adult entertainment.
What's the highest valuation of any of those companies? Now what percentage of MasterCard's current 380 billion market cap or Visa's 485 billion market cap is that?
There's other factors with porn at play that have been discussed. But yeah, I don't think a multi-hundred billion dollar company is going to risk having all its assets seized for engaging in activities that are considered illegal by the federal government. Small companies can take this risk. These aren't the same.
Green Thumb Industries. [1] Current market cap $1.6 billion. [2]
Look, you're right: the federal prohibition definitely has consequences. But also, there are 8 and 9-figure companies operating in this space.
Fwiw, my argument is that compared to Visa or Mastercard, you weren't going to find a company that has anywhere near the valuation. You're still well under 1% of either of them, and pointing to a company that's been around just under a decade. I'm not saying they aren't big, just that the risk to Visa and Mastercard is very high and it would be idiotic to risk all that just to accept payments for weed.
E.g. the largest tomato producer in the U.S. is Lipman and they have ~$350 million [1] revenue, with probably a 1x multiple.
[1] https://www.zoominfo.com/c/lipman-family-farms/346563103