are looking for something different out of the system and from this product. >> host: here is a chart on the support for legalizing marijuana going back to 1969 when 84% opposed it you can see how that has changed over the years. a few comments from twitter. is there nothing more important going on in the country that this misdirection for the ill-informed masses penelope says weed isn't a gateway drug, alcohol and cigarettes are, killing.al steve says the anti-legalization forces of the same prohibitionists but criminalized busybody uses what he calls them and keren says this has been a mind altering experience. william is in burnsville

minnesota.li good morning. >> caller: i have a quick commentary. i believe the whole marijuana issue is really minute in relation to all of the important things we have to decide in the next year or two. the marijuana movement for the legalization is basically out of the liberal reactionary activists genre of people. it's a small group of people and they are basically of no importance at all. medical marijuana i could see where it maybe has some place in prescription medicine but recreational marijuana, note that it's ridiculous. i would like to ask this gentleman have you ever had to show up at work with a coworkerw their clothes stink, their eyes are yellow as marbles and they can't function.

cattle and buffalo have grazedil on why old marijuana for centuries but they don't have to drive buses or cars in traffic. they just chill out. but when you have a bunch of people out there that are doped up on recreational marijuana iss quite a nuisance. it is a very unnecessary thing. >> guest: i have to correct a few things on that call. i agree the issue is one that is minor compared to some of the major issues facing the nation right now but here's the reality this is an issue being voted on in nine states this year. this is a policy that for medical marijuana for instance$2 about 200 million americans live in states that have medical marijuana programs. this is a real public policy and things people care about that affect their lives that peopleng are talking about and i think the idea that this is thedrivin

liberal left driving this really emerges from a total misinformation and lack of understanding about the movement ad who supports it. liberals certainly do but if you look around there are moderatesv conservatives, libertarians, some that join hands with somees of the most liberal members of r congress so while i think the caller has an idea in his mind that every marijuana user is behaving in an inappropriate way he added that it emerges from one small segment of the economy i think if you look at colorado and washington that the legalized marijuana with a 65% of the vote, other states that legalized with a high year percentage it really puts into perspective how diverse the coalition is but ends up supporting the marijuana reform.

>> host: the initiative is in nine states, five states it is r legalization, california it is proposition 64. this is the front page of the inland valley daily bulletinn talking about proposition 64. arizona it is to 65, nevada, number two, in mena's question number one, massachusetts it is question number four. we are talking for a couple more minutes. john is in west chester pennsylvania. good morning. drualler: my comment is relative to the drug enforcement officer. saying that marijuana is a stepping stone to the hard drugs and we don't need that. the ama says the hospital problems associated are ten times worse than tobacco and we

are going broke paying for people in hospitals that had tobacco in their lives and it's causing many health problems and we don't need ten times more mcout this marijuana. >> guest: as i mentioned before, a drug enforcement o officer certainly argue there is a gateway effect. the problem is drug enforcement officers are not scientists or sociologists. they are people that tend to rely on the government language to make their points. as i said earlier in theffect program, marijuana is proven noe to be a gateway effect. the plaintiff marijuana causing ten times as many effects as tobacco i have no idea where the data is from..

i studied this issue every day that the plaintiffs i think a lot of people look at this issue and way out the costs and benefits and i think a lot ofot people haven't seen many benefits from the drug prohibition and they are willing tthat they arewilling to think r systems could be put in place where the benefits are better than they are in the prohibition and the costs can be managed. >> host: if you want to read about the data behind this, marijuana a short history, senior fellow in governance studies at the brookings institution if you want to follow him on twitter it is johnjhudak. campaigns converge on north carolina in the final week before election day. joining us on the phone from charlotte is a reporter for the charlotte observer. thanks for being with us.

why has north carolina become such a battleground state? >> guest: part of it is due to demographic changes, you' you ga lot of people moving from the northeast and a lot of maloney was moving to urban areas like charlotte and the politics have just become more moderate. you still have the urban and rural divide the people that used to vote for jesse helms, used a democrat and are now republicans and there are a lot of them in rural areas into the urban areas are pretty blue across the country. >> the president speaking to visit to the state, donald trump and north carolina first day, what is their message and who are they appealing to a? >> guest: i think trump is appealing to the people he has appealed to that most of his

rallies in fact he's having a rally in a rural area near charlotte that is in the same arena he's already had one this year, so he's going back to his stronghold which is in rural north carolina so it's those republicans that are at the base of the support and president obama is going to chapel hill at the heart of the triangle in a college town. a lot of young voters there and then h he's also going to fayetteville and charlotte, fayetteville has college presentpresence and of course my presence and large african-american presence. we don't know what the venues are yet but this is a big urban area. by 100,000 votes years ago. >> based o >> based on early voting what indication do you have on the overall turnout in north carolina? >> guest: the turnout is high. high.

there's about 2 milliothere is e that have already voted. the people that look at this stuff expected to be about 60% of the voters voting early either by absentee ballot or in-person early voting. with the patterns are showing so far is democrats are a little under. they are a 2012 performance and republicans are a little over their performance. and independents and unaffiliated voters are like a third from what they were in 2012, so i don't think anybody is quite sure what that means. based on all the analysis that we've been following with regards to the electronic college, the general sentiment seems to be north carolina is a state hillary clinton would like to win. for donald trump is a must win state. do you agree? >> guest: that's from the conventional wisdom of claim ten wins it is a flip of 30 electoral votes, 15 that she would have gotten and 15 he

wouldn't have gotten although lately you hear he has other paths to victory and maybe it's not as important that we like to think it is and she's been here a lot and both candidates and vice presidential nominees have been all over north carolina, so -- >> host: you have a hotly contested governor's race and the senate race that's become competitive. >> guest: nobody expected the senate race to be that competitive at the beginning because democrats who are more prominent turn down the race and deborah ross who was kind of a little-known legislator became the nominee but she has run a strong race and its competitive

with a margin of error. we had one last week that came out and showed her within two points of senator burr, the republican, then we have a competitive gubernatorial. >> get a sense of the demographics in north carolina when the returns are coming in what will you be looking for to determine the trends on the presidential level and the closely watched statewide races? >> guest: i think i would be looking at the turnout figures in the urban areas and in raleigh and charlotte as well as the winston-salem area and be returned to see what the turnout is in the area which is trump country. those are the areas and in the suburbs, too tending to be more blue than they normally are. we've heard a lot so the suburbs would be an area to watch.

>> we will look for your reporting online at the charlotte observer.com, jim morrill, the reporter for the charlotte observer, thank you for being with us. >> guest: my pleasure. thank you. now a look at marijuana policy in colorado and other states following its decriminalization for medical and recreational use. state solicitor generals and legal experts talk about federal drug policy and the impact of legalization on neighboring states. this is about an hour and a half. i am really pleased to have

a chance to introduce you to our next session which is current and emerging issues of legalized marijuana. when i was thinking about this panel, i thought what in the world am i doing moderating on marijuana. i think my wife said he probably drew the short end of the joint. [laughter] just to clarify unlike the session we had yesterday, this will not be an interactive session. [laughter] it's undeniable over the last decade we've witnessed a tremendous shift in the legalization of marijuana in various forms among the states. as of today, four states, colorado, washington, oregon and alaska and district of columbia legalized th recreational use ad another 25 states have d.,

biased position. indeed it's a testament for the timeliness of the session voters and ain at least nine states wil decide the various measures this november. arizona, california, maine, massachusetts, nevada consider legalizing the recreational use of marijuana as well. arkansas, florida, montana, north dakota are considering medical marijuana. our fascination with marijuana is no new phenomenon. marijuana's existence dates back over 10,000 years and came to the united states before the american revolution. in fact early revolutionaries grew strains of cannabis for mass hemp production. closer to home at the time it became a state in 1876 vote hemp an1876 both hempand marijuana wd have multiple uses. but in 1917, as part of a growing movement for colorado criminalized the use of marijuana as a misdemeanor and later made it a felony.

that situation lasted for 40 years and nobody over the age of 60 knows that the use of marijuana stride in the late 60s in our college campuses. i'm only 59 and a half, so i'm not sure what you're talking about here. [laughter] in 1970, recreational possession was downgraded in colorado to a misdemeanor and 1975 possession of less than an ounce. that's the legalization movement. colorado is the leader of the united states. in the late 1970s and early 1980s, colorado passed several measures to legalize medical marijuana but the efforts never got off the ground due to federal law to find it as a schedule one controlled substance in 1970. that brings us to the current state of the law in colorado. and 2,000, colorado passed an amendment 20th amended the state constitution to allow the medical use of marijuana the

november, 2012, amendment 64 making colorado along with washington one of the first in the union to legalize recreational use of marijuana. efforts in 2015 marijuana sales in colorado came in at nearly $1 billion, which is up 700 million in 2014. i'm sure our panelists will comments that we are on track for $2 billion in sales this year. that's produced over $35 million in tax revenues so far. currently there are 698 marijuana dispensaries or storefronts in colorado. to pu put that number in perspective that is more than the number of mcdonald's, starbucks and 711 combined. notably, legalization is a policy banning individual cities can decide or not to allow or not allow dmarko to become

medical marijuana businesses. the jurisdictions in colorado 71% have already banned the recreational marijuana businesses. i would like to recognize the distinguished panel of speakers. panel members represent academia and the bar so i hope you can walk away from the theoretical and practical understanding of the experience is. first is the law professor at vanderbilt university who teaches constitutional law, federalism and milk did it come marijuana law and policy. the leading expert on marijuana policy and has written testified lectures on the state's constitutional authority to legalize marijuana. federal preemption of state marijuana reforms. and the process of completing the textbook policy to be published later this year.

and my alma mater and his textbook will probably be in the classroom next fall. he's referred to in the fifth circuit. the second speaker is well known, professor sam at the collegcollege of law. an expert on marijuana law reform and was a member of the colorado governor's amendment 64 implementation task force. he's published over a dozen articles on the subject of marijuana law reform and co-author of altered states inside colorado's marijuana economy for slate magazine. the next speaker is the attorney generaattorneygeneral of the st. he was the chief deputy attorney general and the senior assistant

supervising the natural resource division in the attorney general's office and he's succeeded the wyoming attorney general before that. continuing, he was the clerk for joseph and the wyoming supreme court. the next speaker is a special introduction for me, the solicitor general in the state of colorado and this is a treat because he's one of my former clerks. as the solicitor general to determine the legal strategy for fuel as well as select constitutional litigation. before becoming solicitor general he was the assistant solicitor general and is a graduate of dartmouth college at the university of chicago law school and in addition to working for me he clerked for mark phillips in the district in

illinois and i might add that he in addition to speaking at the first bar conference he has an argument in the supreme court coming up in october. of the next speaker is the deputy solicitor general in oklahoma. he litigates issues on behalf of the state. prior to joining the attorney general's office, he worked for gibson dunn specializing in appeals and administrative law cases. a former clerk on the fifth circuit and we welcome you today. with those introductions to get started. >> thank you for inviting me out. here is a rich and fascinating body of laws that developed over

the last 20 years. to understand these laws, we need to understand the constraints that have been posed by the federal government because many features of the state law are quite peculiar and represents the states to work around for the constraints. i will talk about free examples to help illustrate the point and then i want to discuss why some of these may be problematic for both the federal and state perspective. before doing that, i want to give a quick overview of what the state has been doing over the last 20 years. this is the 25,000-foot view in the last 20 years of the state marijuana reform. this all started back in 96 with

california's passage on the left-hand side, california's passage of 215. that was the wall that permitted some people to use marijuana for medical purposes. that particular type proliferated across other states in the ensuing years as is depicted in the chart you see that represents those states with marijuana reform. it picked up a bit in 2009, 2010 and then you also saw the reforms emerge as well perhaps most notably here in colorado and washington state to state started to allow people to use marijuana for recreational purposes as well.

those reforms are represented in green and then in 2014, it's also noteworthy that you saw a number of conservative states jump in and they were reluctant but these states did legalize the plant and legalized it for certain purposes that are presented its hard to tell them from the prohibition state but one remarkable thing that you see on this chart is that as of today as of 2016, there are 43 states that allow some people to use marijuana legally. even though throughout this entire period the content of the

federal law has remain unchanged. of course the federal law and the use and possession of marijuana. the states found ways to work tk around federal obstacles and let me give you three examples of that. the first one the states found ways to get doctors to help lead the medical use of marijuana without exposing federal sanctions and this is critical for the marijuana state that want to limit access to the drug in other words they want to allow people to use it for medical purposes. and for other controlled substances to states commonly used positions for exampl are ef you want to go out and get percocet that is an opioid painkiller, you need a doctor's

prescription. you can just walk into a walgreens or cvs but the states can do that and that's because physicians can't prescribe this particular drug or any drug on schedule on. if they do, they threatened to yank their registration to prescribe controlled substances. so in the state program the required position for the prescription would be a nonstarter. no physician is going to risk their registration to the dea, the practice and livelihood to prescribe marijuana. in fact the states already knew this when california passed this back in 96 and so this example

of the wall that was passed almost two decades prior to california's this was actually passed in virginia in 1979. it is a medical marijuana law that allows people to possess and use free of the sanctions so long as they get the prescription to use the drug. but the law from 1979 didn't have a m. affect survey was still on and about in those days but they didn't have a practical effect. in california the proponents found a workaround and what was that? it only required the physician to recommend, not to prescribe. that may seem lik semantics buty

later convinced them that it made a difference and in fact when a doctor simply recommends marijuana all that entails is having a conversation where you declare you might benefit from the use, the circuit declared that was protected speech. as a practical matter, that meant they couldn't punish doctors for issuing a recommendation although it could for issuing a prescription. so every state followed the proposition 15, every other state that adopted a law followed the path and now requires a recommendation. they call it different things. they do not require a prescription. the second way the states found ways to diffuse the threat of the federal crackdown on the

marijuana supply. if people couldn't actually get marijuana it's like me telling my 5-year-old son you can have an alligator as a pet, he's going to be happy with me, very happy tha that i've allowed himo get an alligator as a pet but he will be disappointed and probably mad when they discover they don't offer one. in the past 20 years the states have had to provide marijuana and two basic ways for people to legally obtain marijuana under the state law. one is to grow it themselves. it's normally considered under most states to be a trafficking offense but these states that you can grow it yourself. ..

>> >> you can grow with yourself if you want but

they are an operation across the state and there are at couple of states when it is set they prefer commercial cultivation like arizona and massachusetts if the store is too far away you can't go with yourself it is a hardship when. not it depicts the of regulatory models overtime. the red on the chart that has that personal cultivation. if you wanted marijuana after do-it-yourself that you could only get it better is a combination would bet you can choose to get a from a store if it is purple and the solid blue are the

states that preferred commercial cultivation. and as you can see from the chart the 1996 days from long ago that if it was the only game in town devastates were almost exclusively with red. whatever some operating in california and elsewhere but they were considered illegal under state law. but 2009 with that distribution model. to allow those to sell marijuana. those earliest dates that turn purple that allow them

to grow with themselves but interestingly every state that has passed marijuana reform every single one is a blue state or a mixed blues state 51 to you to go to a store to buy a rather than on growing yourself. also to grade commercial cultivation from other states it goes back to where enforcement the large-scale commercial suppliers name much more vulnerable target that is growing a handful of plans and in nearly-- the federal government tried to shut down the large commercial suppliers they

could not allow for individual patients or caregivers there was far too many of them hundreds of hundreds of thousands so those that knew the federal government would crack down at least in part that they could ensure that qualified patients would have a supply of marijuana to be interrupted by the federal government. in 2009 and department of justice and then that they

think to sell marijuana to patients. new with that commercial cultivation. and those that proliferate. with those licensed by the state to sell marijuana circa 2004 even more on the map today there are hundreds of the shops in colorado and other states as well. but even with the commercial supply had caught all and there is something they have not done. budget is surprising only under federal law.

so with a final example, where does the state's wine to this date no state has directly owned and operated a commercial marijuana store. this is surprising to me. so following the repeal of alcohol prohibition when the states repealed all call prohibition many decided to own and operate a piece of the alcohol distribution market. as a week to curb illegal sales and also to curb that initial inclination of private enterprises to grow the market with that model has lost popularity today but even today about one-third of the state continue directly to control some aspect of alcohol distribution. there is now called store in

new hampshire so why aren't there any state owned and operated marijuana stores? this is rather states have not been able to work around federal law. in particular they cannot work around the pre-emption concerns further if the state were to own and operate a marijuana distribution center for store, there could be a lawsuit arguing this day operation was pre-emptive to get those injunctions. the same thing that later there could be state regulation but then to eliminate those does not stop that person and then to

be free and clear so these concerns are out there but it is for those stay on and operated that is why the state's have not looked at this particular business. so no brief that will briefly conclude to give my thoughts but for those freed - - three examples show federal law has changed. with say a large way it would distort the development of state law. of the last 20 years the federal government has spent playing a high risk strategy . in other words they were betting that they would not be willing to repeal their own prohibition, they could not get doctors to issue prescriptions with a prescription monetary programs or could not allowed to create the large negative regulated commercial operations.

the federal government got a wrong the states were willing to do that. but the results is the perspective of the states from the federal government so we end up with the system that any state left to its own devices could adopt. so i will give you example so to be a model to the stage in the early years with a 70 year-old cancer patient you can use marijuana legally to grow yourself. but not everybody has that access. or in california to growing industry do so from the perspective it did not serve patients even from the federal government's perspective it wasn't necessarily the model you want the states to choose because they choose that to

a vague federal law enforcement. the new personal cultivaticultivati on operations but they could not stop those without the state to supervise them it is very difficult to monitor the 100,000 patients to maybe growing a few in their basement to make sure that they do not sell it. so ultimately this example is a hardball strategy to see if the works that well with either party. >> i am thrilled to be here to talk with all of you of this important issue.

i will talk about the stalemate of the marijuana law. and to give up a sense of how we got to this place but here we are now the better the implications going into the election 2016 policy-making 2017 and beyond. mentioning 2009, this is the place with the other cautionary department of justice those that most refer to as the memorandum. but most of the of log drug enforcement in the country with those foot soldiers of its the war are drugs. there would be no different than that for experiment but

then gave voice to deference to the state so with the surgeon federal criteria i am sure there would have something to say about that shortly. and the other things such as the development of organized crime bill laugh with the state government to be that policy-making choice.

with the treasury and financial crimes during courage banking with some of memorandum and also by president obama they're all in the same direction to say how that experience plays out. so this is the enforcement priority this is not the legalization of marijuana in it is simply law-enforcement.

so don't beat yourself up if you have not heard this but with the bill enacted by congress that stated that funds made available to the department of justice to prevent such states from making their own state laws with the distribution and cultivation of medical marijuana. to implementing their own state law. with a criminal defendant to california?

to be prohibited with those states that were authorized with the state medical law. with the prohibition on prosecution for those entering cajun contact to fully comply of such laws. although you are acting in accord with the state law. so to create some circumstances so to be in compliance with state law.

but the other aids to quite a bit of litigation but to say it is medical but to no respect what that means? can i say that because it remains legal but there are

lateral consequences that despite the memo consistently for the industry last year it was say $1 billion cash business. and that is a bad idea for people in those business to pay the employees in cash that employees for the employees to go home with their paychecks in cash but one of the things the government has charged the states with to keep organized crime out so they're trying to regulate to tax marijuana but it negative business is

incredibly hard to regulate because there is no paper trail. so that hampers blocks of state rules also putting citizens that risk. so another issue that is pampered so a few are in violation of the substance control act except to the cost of goods sold are unavailable. if it is north the 70% and also creates those incentives the only way is to make more. the only deduction is a day increase their cost by making more marijuana that may not be the best public policy. but one that we normally

think of businesses with the use, that has been a mixed reality sense states have begun legalizing marijuana. so with today's health care teach a seat that is great but with those colorado dispensaries. and also get of coalfield the vintage. but then to show up with the arizona state court were drug dealers. [laughter] and they wanted their money

the judge said you didn't have to repay the contract on public policy. while paid is at the time may have seen like a win for the marijuana industry getting people to pay their debt probably is not the best for this emerging industry. also with a specially insurance cases like in the district of colorado, there were some crops damaged by a big fire in the spring and they had it covered under their insurance policy that included growing crops. so there is another question so what do you do? so you knew that when you set the premiums.

i don't see why you shouldn't have to pay. so why do they say there is a strong public policy against marijuana? but they don't act like it is illegal. so that indicates the view that marijuana right now is a cause i'm legal status. -- quasi legal status but they hope that the person can hold the bankruptcy courts but those in the business cannot. in terms of employment coming from the colorado supreme court unanimously determined and medical marijuana user complies with state law had to be lawful off-duty conduct policy because he was violating

federal law. that the conduct was not lawful including of what could be of interest to those here but every state has some version of contact that the lawyer shall not engage to fit the crime so all conduct remains a legal of whether a lawyer may do anything. with the criminal conduct

this isn't tim permitted under state law. one and said they colorado ethics rules. >> is good to be here. i got the phone call from the active attorney-general after confirmed to the u.s. senate from the chief

japanese bought - - chief deputy spot to be attorney general. and there are some strong opinions with the united states attorney with that legalization to be very adamant and one of the

things that i thought i would do is with what i woodsy -- would receive from that scientific perspective and then to identify for where they are coming from to have the chance as they come into the debate decided charged as this one is. so i will just go through the things that ic and directed meant scheduling that is easy. then to identify brand-new molecule's and that is the substance but the other

thing that is really controversial issue insight into the drug trade we have asset forfeiture like most dates is a very hot topic was the things that i do of the done monday for people who traffic in the drugs. so we get a pretty good view i get 20 or 25 in one year. with the seizure of assets that is just the beginning of the process.

but another thing that i do is with the attorney general's office to have the one said step of appeals so i am in charge and i am very heavily involved so in terms of those cases to see to it is being convicted with some of the things that are happening with those. a big one is a division of criminal and destination. and with the division of criminal investigation. so mostly is wiretaps and

investigations with the criminal division of investigation. end i will spend some time talking about those challenges so i can see that up close to do those things that need to be done. but one thing that i don't do the attorney-general so the drug enforcement so in

light only the attorney general's office so until they come up on appeal. so i don't have a history of that and then to have that experience with what i don't have. and with the drug trade to say prior to that investigation some of the judge talks about his role as a magistrate that is something so around the state of wyoming.

now of course, you probably have already heard this but you only have 600,000 people but the statistic that we seek is different from those larger areas but it may be hardening or worth paying attention. but one thing that i will mention briefly that i will move on with the general observation awakenings are headed to face the law-enforcement ariane it is we do have about the initiative in wyoming right now. is only illegal in the help extract.

so that has some become an important market so with legalize marijuana but what we do have is that ballot initiative. and it needed 30,000 signatures to get on the ballot. it is for medicinal use not recreational use. but like colorado medicinal block was very liberal even 18 year-old could claim they have fibril myalgia to get a certificate down the street. but that is with those

physical conditions that could lead to consuming that legally. potentially the signatures would have to be collected so what may not make it on the about it but there is some problems that could be problematic and the biggest is there is no opposition or opt out. that is a strong tradition whether education or other areas for local control that is what the growers may have difficulty to excepting that position of marijuana in the community so that could be a fatal flaw in the ballot initiative. but because of that the

commission spent a lot of time with some excellent professors university of wyoming. financially they had some very good information about these various issues and policy issues from various places to talk about the various models. it is a very restricted model. so what do i see as pending issues but first i will mention with scientific issues to some extent if marijuana is legal or not we have a statute in wyoming

that says a certain amount of material in the position of liquid for but we don't have that ended is not a supreme court decision that to a high of cooking brownies and chocolate. but then he got caught. said did not go to the supreme court but there were issues. is extracted so as a liquid or a solid? said even just those issues i guess the competition it

is so difficult to figure out marijuana in the crime lab so without changing the quantity with the sample so using a gas chromatic graf but so of the material but it's in that area had to get that material to calibrate? we do know if we go to the gas station the inspectors

core around to make sure that the amount coming out of the pomp and yazov to do that enabled crime laboratory. because of that calibration material. and of the sample degrades over time. set will be an issue for the crime lab's. with that to do a recent

study to involve medical marijuana. and those have less than 25% of those packages were within 10 percent accuracy in the example. so those are significant issues just to point this out to regulate marijuana and regulating the thc content. to say this in wyoming to be traffic and to the state the direction is then the direction of adults those were some of the biggest scientific challenges.

>> >> but with oklahoma against colorado. with the spillover into wyoming of marijuana purchased from colorado. but with the amount of marijuana in wyoming so this

pretty easy to tell. so with the quick couple issues from 2014 replaced 127 million and a share in 2015 and moved up 100 critics so intent 2014 so currently there is a big percentage increase coming from marijuana and colorado. real estate and the largest increase in some parts of wyoming that we expected 15

years we have similar increase so the evidence is pretty clear with the favored state we have more marijuana coming into our state from colorado much purchased from those legal dispensaries. >> so a song that have impact on a neighboring state and he was the school principal but there are some big issues. but in those days there was a time when all high-school

sock started a no-smoking school. only in designated areas. so pretty soon every right would be smoking in the classroom. but then as they come back again there are these areas with the public to think about these things. and to be in that marijuana area. and to prepare those reports for this state one of those that found so striking for what we know about tobacco

today is the long-term effects of what i have seen is not that good. and so of course, with that issue them with those clinical trials. and then scientifically with those long-term effects. also for example, the attorneys jefferies -- attorneys general to reduce tobacco. and then it is going down dramatically in the country.

but addend. >> again we appreciate your time. >> so what are the challenges that you and your office space to represent state law? to understand in terms of perspective and i am lucky and that regard without the controversy to put that aside. at least if you are a legal

nerd like me but the prospective is wrestling with questions of pre-emption if you break federal law and remarkable after 20 years of legalized marijuana of what method to use and to all they scratched the surface in the controlled substances act. and with that standard that measures the effects. or a much more narrow version. and then there is no

pre-emption. so we wrestle with that. and then it successfully. and still we don't get much of clarity with standing issues or preliminary issues. and then to turn that back over is to have that enforcement guidance. in how they viewed those priorities. and how they are met or how they would ago about to enforcing against the state

that they're not holding the other end of the bargain. addenda then to the state of washington to preserve that option to force the preemption provision against the state of colorado. and here we are four years later into commercialized recreation marijuana. and then to enforce of the prosecution basis. that isn't satisfactory either. and then on the other side of congress. and how to approach the problem. in den to say as long as

they are compliant with the dlj you cannot spend money on the prosecution to entrap the state regulatory process. but you also know from the cases of cannabis in the u.s. supreme court matter what you are doing of the controlled substances act. and then the very specific way to play out without situations and so far it is up to the states to regulate to the best of their ability. and with the regulatory structure that survives challenges.

>> with the empirical the fact with added decrease of crime activities or drug-trafficking? to see that impact and then turn that to the other panelists. with that role aspect. but to have some major law enforcement issues to be coronated by this office and with those medicalize to cover up interstate trafficking. i know they catch headlines it is difficult and a very

granular level with the increasing use of a baseline certainly the numbers and we're getting from the federal government suggests there is an increase of trafficking so there are some compelling arguments that were not anticipated so i don't know if i have enough information to speculate how that plays out. >> oklahoma sued colorado tell us about that. [laughter] so richly with the supreme

court with that jurisdiction between states end up with those mayors are standing. and to intervene. to have those pre-emptive claims. for those states that border colorado but the bigger issue and with that authorization because it is still in legal. and with the constitutional order. with the effects of the bordering state with

interstate trafficking is the reality to be increased so going into 36 different states and i am sure that number has increased. in there not many systems and place to come in colorado and one offender live from oklahoma to colorado then came back so in addition to the trafficking outside of colorado that there are lots of people coming in.

to participate in the marijuana margin. but that is primarily driven so those attacks are motivated partly because of marijuana but with that statistic. but you would notice the concentration is what you'd expect in major metropolitan areas and the display is not a surprising result you would expect that to naturally occur with interstate trafficking especially uh consequences of the industrialization of

marijuana. so i was on a flight to say what he's speaking about this conference? she said don't you think there should be federal coordinating drug laws between the states to cause problems? i smiled to say whether there should be i don't know but the reality is there already is. so many years ago congress passed along but now had a very odd time in history to have their own policies regarding marijuana. wan i cannot think of another situation at any time in history in a manner

that caused this proliferation of other states. in then it creates a novel legal issue with the nature of the union and the role of the federal court. so it is the subject that raises the question for the policy to be at stake so what approach to looking at this issue for those to rectify? and to start with the premise they have the ability to state the - - to set the policy. it was apparently interested to provide solutions and

then we can vote of the interstate issue with their own sovereignty so what happens when the state goes back for those externalities'? alexander hamilton said to call this problem through the articles of confederation. but the problem is that the states have observed your disregarded. but it acts as a negative in creation of the federal court to enforce the supremacy clause. and then it would be

effective in hamilton said it would be a mere treaty if not a government. so we don't use that for a blind pursuit of states' rights and then to be sure. and then i saw lucite of the fact and then to be authorized the marijuana production but congress got to gather because it was determined that it is a substance n number two how do you track it between states but this agreement is

part of the entire delegation. but to have control of local position that nothing to talk about the interstate trafficking of drugs. and then to undermine the ban. then then now chosen to pull back with the marijuana market with that express purpose of the $1 billion industry. and then precisely intend the type of what they try to prevent. but that is what they intended to have with the nationwide ban.

with that unresolved tension. with that irreconcilable differences. and then to make that unlawful under federal law. in them by the same federal statutes. and then by the federal statute. n then to preserve the union and then once they enjoyed the benefit.

and then to be repealed. and then to regulate. and then to be classified. but the question is with the peace deal of notification. and then other the legal issues emerge as well. because the prohibition of national policy for so long has been arrested. that has many other vexing legal questions. and did ask me if i use

illicit drugs in his you probably. >> so this is just a sampling is the status quo of these conflicting laws. so of course, none of the questions show the larger question of the constitutional structure. and then to be given the negative. to be the most interesting and most pressing questions regard marijuana. >> so for those academics for the m to react and if

they rioted in private if that's true. with social services to support that. and what this the consequences? >> but i'd take certainly of colorado or any other state the allies is marijuana it laugh have an effect outside this date which is the classic collective action but there is a proper way but what congress has done is to go off state law enforcement from congress benefited from that and was

policing the prior prohibition but now they have no obligation as the colorado member states and then to ban the firearms and state law does not but the way for congress is to pass legislation to grandfather federal enforcement you cannot plead marijuana but that does not prevent congress from stepping in to have that allegiance. >> but i was like to take some questions from the audience.

>> is said that they cannot be dismantled to say that those dispensaries because of law-enforcement agencies that have chosen that legal substances act to take place against medical marijuana. and then to end their experiment. so that is a policy decision that they should be allowed their under no obligation to pass prohibition