No power

[rob]

In New York City, the utility ConEd said the 228,000 customers in Manhattan still without power should have it back by Saturday, but that would leave more than 400,000 elsewhere potentially in the dark beyond Saturday. In a statement Thursday, ConEd said it hoped the vast majority of those would have power by Nov. 11.

 

The areas taking the longest, spokeswoman Sara Banda told NBCNews.com, are those with overhead lines. Crews have had to deal with 100,000 downed lines, ConEd said.

 

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/01/14854036-sandy-power-outages-for-hundreds-of-thousands-into-next-week-as-new-storm-builds?lite

[ivan]

Misinformation. Fully covered: licensed, taxed, and regulated private stores supplied by licensed, taxed, and regulated growers. Obviously, distribution across state lines is not permitted.

 

Sec. 4. (1) There shall be a marijuana producer's

license to produce marijuana for sale at wholesale to marijuana

processors and other marijuana producers, regulated by the state

liquor control board and subject to annual renewal. The production,

possession, delivery, distribution, and sale of marijuana in

accordance with the provisions of this act and the rules adopted to

implement and enforce it, by a validly licensed marijuana producer,

shall not be a criminal or civil offense under Washington state law.

 

you're doing the lord's work sir, keep it up

 

that said, it's gonna take a big set of nuts to actually set up the first state-sanctioned stores, given that the feds will be itching to seize the whole shooting match in the name of sneering at the will of the people...reckon obama *might* be better in that respect, given that he won't have to run for re-election w/ the cloud of "soft on crime" hanging over his head?

[ivan]

In New York City, the utility ConEd said the 228,000 customers in Manhattan still without power should have it back by Saturday, but that would leave more than 400,000 elsewhere potentially in the dark beyond Saturday. In a statement Thursday, ConEd said it hoped the vast majority of those would have power by Nov. 11.

 

The areas taking the longest, spokeswoman Sara Banda told NBCNews.com, are those with overhead lines. Crews have had to deal with 100,000 downed lines, ConEd said.

 

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/01/14854036-sandy-power-outages-for-hundreds-of-thousands-into-next-week-as-new-storm-builds?lite

seems like comparing the power distribution system of a city and a sub-urb/rural community is distinctly apples n' oranges.

[tvashtarkatena]

More frequency of storms like this could definitely tip the life cycle cost equation towards more underground lines at higher capacities, but not as much as you might think.

 

Underground lines are hugely more expensive...and hugely more expensive and time consuming to repair. The cables last half as long as above ground as well, primarily due to degradation of the thick insulation required. Above ground lines are quick and cheap to repair, in contrast.

 

It's estimated that to put all of Wa DC undergound, for example, would cost $ 6 B - more than $100 per month extra for each customer. Most folks would opt for a few days of blackout every decade or so instead of paying that premium, even in the face of more frequent storms.

 

High capacity lines will probably remain above ground for the foreseeable future, but most storm damage hits local distribution, anyway.

 

An investment in more emergency power generation capacity for critical functions like hospitals would probably be a better near term investment.

[tvashtarkatena]

Misinformation. Fully covered: licensed, taxed, and regulated private stores supplied by licensed, taxed, and regulated growers. Obviously, distribution across state lines is not permitted.

 

Sec. 4. (1) There shall be a marijuana producer's

license to produce marijuana for sale at wholesale to marijuana

processors and other marijuana producers, regulated by the state

liquor control board and subject to annual renewal. The production,

possession, delivery, distribution, and sale of marijuana in

accordance with the provisions of this act and the rules adopted to

implement and enforce it, by a validly licensed marijuana producer,

shall not be a criminal or civil offense under Washington state law.

 

you're doing the lord's work sir, keep it up

 

that said, it's gonna take a big set of nuts to actually set up the first state-sanctioned stores, given that the feds will be itching to seize the whole shooting match in the name of sneering at the will of the people...reckon obama *might* be better in that respect, given that he won't have to run for re-election w/ the cloud of "soft on crime" hanging over his head?

 

Crime ED hasn't been a big federal election issue, of late. 41 years of a lost Drug War kinda toned that down a bit.

 

Our choice of WA Attorney General is actually more important than either the Gov or the Prez. Bob Ferguson (D) has pledged to respect the will of WA voters regarding 502. His ® opponents - not so much, but it'll still be a helluva catfight to defy us all.

 

Don't know what Mittenz would do, but Obama will likely stick with his current DOJ, which busts only those operations which violate state law.

 

I502 actually doesn't violate federal law. States are free to enforce laws on drugs as they see fit. In addition, the federal law in question: the Controlled Substances Act - requires a 'positive conflict' - that is, that the state 'force' people to violate federal law. 502 does no such thing - no one is 'forced' to obtain a pot license. It's completely voluntary. No state employee need ever handle MJ - testing is done by independent private entities - the state just manages that process. MJ businesses can be inspected, but again, the inspectors need never handle the product in the process. OK, they might sample it once in a while on the sly...

 

Politically, the teabagging GOP would have to explain why it's going after a state that just added half a billion a year to its budget for basically doing not much other than changing a law and issuing some licenses.

 

Hey, it's all just my ego talking from the empty chair next to me, so we'll see in a few days how it starts to play out...or not.

 

Walking some precincts to get infrequent voters off the dime is the best thing to do right about now. 502's gonna be a squeeker I think.

Edited November 1, 2012 by tvashtarkatena

[ivan]

it's hard to imagine the feds sitting on their hands when legal washington weed starts showing up in idaho and oregon?

[rob]

if romney is elected, it will be an interesting test of his supposed "States Rights" platform.

[ivan]

if romney is elected, it will be an interesting test of his supposed "States Rights" platform.

the historical irony of the party of lincoln now championing the supremacy of individual states is...uh...uh...well over the head of most republicans?

[tvashtarkatena]

It's no small contingent at the federal level that wouldn't love to see a lot less money thrown down the shitter called the War on Drugs right about now.

 

DOMA's proved to be a stinker for them in court...why not make it a twofer?

 

Federal heavy handedness at the state level can wind up being, well, less than popular among the electorate at large, particularly in this political climate. If the feds wound up in court (and certain organizations would make sure that they would) in the event of a crackdown, the risk of losing would be substantial - exacting even more political cost.

 

Hilary's a shoe in for 2016 if O takes it, Heil to zee Librul Reich, so why fuck that up? Plus, the country will be four years older, and that means four years of giving less of a shit about things like gay weed as the horseshoe crab population dies off. I just don't see such a political investment paying off for anyone.

 

One thing I do see is a great fat steaming turd dropped from the stratosphere by the feds onto any pot farm who tries to truck the stank across state lines. Idaho n Oregon - git yer countryfied shit together and join in! It's best if WA keeps a tight lid on that action its own self, though, to avoid a Holy Plague of Earbuds.

 

Edited November 1, 2012 by tvashtarkatena

[KaskadskyjKozak]

if romney is elected, it will be an interesting test of his supposed "States Rights" platform.

the historical irony of the party of lincoln now championing the supremacy of individual states is...uh...uh...well over the head of most republicans?

 

The Confederacy was not an "individual state".

[tvashtarkatena]

if romney is elected, it will be an interesting test of his supposed "States Rights" platform.

 

Given what we've seen of the man, I think we can expect everything Romney has ever promised to be erased by his inauguration, should the poo flow that direction.

 

My biggest hope would be that the pragmatic technoweenie side of Mittenz would reconstitute itself, but I'm still not sure how much good that would do given a Tea Bagged House, who will continue to want blood to flow.

 

People say "oh, but he was governor of MA". He was a shitty governor of MA. Case in point - who do you think quashed that Boston pharma biz that's now killing shitloads of people with meningitis. Yup. That shit will still be killing lots of folks for years - its just gotten the weakest ones so far.

[ivan]

if romney is elected, it will be an interesting test of his supposed "States Rights" platform.

the historical irony of the party of lincoln now championing the supremacy of individual states is...uh...uh...well over the head of most republicans?

 

The Confederacy was not an "individual state".

the confederate states said the supremacy of state rights over federal rights allowed them to secede (and having divorced their first wife, now being free to remarry whoever they want) - that if their state right to set internal policies was being abused by the feds, that they had the right to leave the country. republicans, of course, at that time said that was bullshit, that states were subordinate to the federal governmetn (it's there in article 6 n' everything) and that south carolina and her little bitch friends couldn't just take their ball and go home.

Edited November 1, 2012 by ivan

[tvashtarkatena]

Isn't the country's most high profile states rights dispute taught in, like, preschool?

 

Your gentility regarding this matter is admirable, sir.

[G-spotter]

In New York City, the utility ConEd said the 228,000 customers in Manhattan still without power should have it back by Saturday, but that would leave more than 400,000 elsewhere potentially in the dark beyond Saturday. In a statement Thursday, ConEd said it hoped the vast majority of those would have power by Nov. 11.

 

The areas taking the longest, spokeswoman Sara Banda told NBCNews.com, are those with overhead lines. Crews have had to deal with 100,000 downed lines, ConEd said.

 

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/01/14854036-sandy-power-outages-for-hundreds-of-thousands-into-next-week-as-new-storm-builds?lite

 

GO RON TESLA

[KaskadskyjKozak]

if romney is elected, it will be an interesting test of his supposed "States Rights" platform.

the historical irony of the party of lincoln now championing the supremacy of individual states is...uh...uh...well over the head of most republicans?

 

The Confederacy was not an "individual state".

the confederate states said the supremacy of state rights over federal rights allowed them to secede (and having divorced their first wife, now being free to remarry whoever they want) - that if their state right to set internal policies was being abused by the feds, that they had the right to leave the country. republicans, of course, at that time said that was bullshit, that states were subordinate to the federal governmetn (it's there in article 6 n' everything) and that south carolina and her little bitch friends couldn't just take their ball and go home.

 

And what did Woodrow Wilson say about the Right of Self-Determination or did that just apply to the Kurds not Amerikuns? Seems to me not so simple as you state it. States Rights on one level, sure, but on secession? Is it then a state right or a human right (of self-determination). Or do you just have it all figured out along with man-booby-boy?

 

 

[rob]

I think Ivan's original quip regarding the irony of the current "State's rights" agenda of the republican party vis-à-vis their federalist stance during the civil war is apt. Both parties have changed pretty dramatically in some ways since those days, don't you think?

[ivan]

And what did Woodrow Wilson say about the Right of Self-Determination or did that just apply to the Kurds not Amerikuns? Seems to me not so simple as you state it. States Rights on one level, sure, but on secession? Is it then a state right or a human right (of self-determination). Or do you just have it all figured out along with man-booby-boy?

 

wilson was of course a democrat (and virginian, no less) and thus not suprisingly of a mindset that would justify both the south's actions in the civil war and autonomy for folks in the balkans

 

as to the last, i'm a teacher, so thus used to being rather unemotional in my disagreements, see?

Edited November 1, 2012 by ivan

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I think Ivan's original quip regarding the irony of the current "State's rights" agenda of the republican party vis-à-vis their federalist stance during the civil war is apt. Both parties have changed pretty dramatically in some ways since those days, don't you think?

 

Ivan wants to portray everyone right of him politically as ignorant. He's not as bad as his egomaniacal sociopathic friend in this regard however and at least Ivan is likable.

 

[tvashtarkatena]

It actually IS pretty simply stated in the US Constitution.

 

Enforcement in the event of a conflict can be, of course, a delicate matter.

 

Article 1 Section 10: Power Prohibited to the States

 

"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

 

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

 

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

 

 

Article 6, Clause 2: Supremacy

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

 

Aaaand, who can forget Article 1, Section 8, Powers of Congress which helped kick off the fireworks:

 

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;

 

Ei:

 

"we want these forts"

 

 

"Can't have em"

 

 

 

Edited November 1, 2012 by tvashtarkatena

[Pete_H]

 

I502 actually doesn't violate federal law.

 

But unfortunately the feds can get very coercive by withholding funding if states don't fall in line. Maybe the state will be making enough from tax revenue they can tell the feds to eat shit and die.

 

I also wonder whether the state will see a huge influx of "pot tourism" should the measure pass; and whether that would be a good or bad thing.

[rob]

 

But unfortunately the feds can get very coercive by withholding funding if states don't fall in line. Maybe the state will be making enough from tax revenue they can tell the feds to eat shit and die.

 

this is my concern as well. Typically the feds seem to withhold transportation funds when states get out of line re: drinking ages, highway speeds, etc. I wonder if they'll try the same thing.

 

I also wonder whether the state will see a huge influx of "pot tourism" should the measure pass

 

Duh.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

I502 actually doesn't violate federal law.

 

But unfortunately the feds can get very coercive by withholding funding if states don't fall in line. Maybe the state will be making enough from tax revenue they can tell the feds to eat shit and die.

 

I also wonder whether the state will see a huge influx of "pot tourism" should the measure pass; and whether that would be a good or bad thing.

 

The projected tax revenues for this initiative are impressive indeed. We could use the money. The Fed better f-off and let the people's will stand. :-)

[tvashtarkatena]

Gregoire has approached the feds about rescheduling pot, which would get rid of any ambiguity entirely.

 

The feds have played 'hide the money' to get states to increase drinking ages to 21 and such, but, given that 502 already has a 21 and DUI provision, their justification might not stand up in court. Gotta treat all the states the same in that regard unless they've got a compelling interest not to - Equal Protection Clause, 14th Amendment baby.

 

Regarding drug tourism, it would be impossible to measure or monitor without controlled borders, and Kanuckistanis have little reason to head south for that purpose.

 

Portugal decriminalized all drugs in 2001, and they did not become a drug tourist attraction. Not an apples to apples example, but its something.

 

The red light district of Amsterdam, where pot has always been illegal but tolerated, is a drug tourism destination, but its also just a tourist destination with lots of other things to offer the repressed British football yob. Kristiania, in Copenhagen, is not a drug tourist destination, however, despite open hash markets (and plenty of bakeries) - probably because its a crime ridden shit hole inhabited by hippy squatters.

Edited November 1, 2012 by tvashtarkatena

[tvashtarkatena]

Bottom line is neither I nor my ego chair can predict where this will go politically. We just have to start by starting and figure it out, cuz what we've been doing fucking sucks from a criminal justice, civil rights, personal liberty, public health, and fiscal standpoint.

 

Being a sociopath, of course, I enjoy the luxury of not giving a fuck.

[ivan]

hard to see pot tourists as anything other than a boon, unlike say, meth n' heroin tourists. i imagine seattle will have no hard time making hendrix n' nirvana inspired attractions

 

if, dog willing, 502 does pass, might be good to remind all the climbers 'round the campfire though that rainer, olympic n' n cascade naty parks won't be inclined to change their enforcement plans