All Blog Posts from Political Hotsheet

As more government officials choose to publicly answer questions submitted by Internet users, they're encountering a new phenomenon: marijuana activists intent on forcing answers to the would-you-legalize-pot question.

In March, President Obama's first virtual town hall took a detour when questions about legalizing marijuana were voted to the top of the financial stability," "jobs," "budget," and (of course) "green jobs" sections of WhiteHouse.gov.

On Wednesday, it was California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) who was put on the spot. Digg.com users propelled a legalize-marijuana question to the number two position (behind one asking about what he was thinking when photographed grimacing at President George W. Bush).

Earlier this month, as CBSNews.com reported, Schwarzenegger said "it's time for debate" about legalizing marijuana. Read on for an excerpt from the CNN interview.

Read full post…

In the last week or two, proposals to legalize medical marijuana have advanced in Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island.

But Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has taken a significant step further, saying on Tuesday that it's time to debate legalizing marijuana for recreational use in California.

"I think it's time for debate," he said in response to a reporter's question. "I think all of those ideas of creating extra revenues -- I'm always for an open debate on it."

Thanks to a 1996 ballot measure, medical marijuana is already legal under California law, though local officials have substantial discretion. Although that conflicts with federal law, the Obama administration has chosen not to target California medical marijuana dispensaries.

"Most Californians support the idea of making marijuana legal," Aaron Smith, the California policy director for the Marijuana Policy Project, told CBSNews.com. "Right now, the state is in a budget fiasco that not going to go away soon... It's about time they look outside the box at ways of generating revenue."

Read full post…

President Obama today held an online town hall meeting in which he answered questions submitted to the White House web site.

As CBS News' Chief Political Correspondent Marc Ambinder points out, the top-rated questions in the “budget” and “fiscal stability” sections of the submissions page concerned the legalization of marijuana.

(Here’s one: “With over 1 out of 30 Americans controlled by the penal system, why not legalize, control, and tax marijuana to change the failed war on drugs into a money making, money saving boost to the economy? Do we really need that many victimless criminals?")

Hotsheet did not expect President Obama to address the pot questions during the town hall, particularly after the event opened with a pair of relatively straightforward questions. But we were wrong: the president interrupted the event midway through to address the issue.

“…we took votes about which questions were going to be asked, and I think 3 million people voted or 3.5 million people voted,” he said. “I have to say that there was one question that was voted on that ranked fairly high, and that was whether legalizing marijuana would improve the economy and job creation.”

The president then joked that “I don't know what this says about the online audience,” prompting laughter from the roughly 100 people gathered in the White House East Room for the event.

“…but I just want -- I don't want people to think that -- this was a fairly popular question,” he continued. “We want to make sure that it was answered.”

And then he answered it in a way that must come as a disappointment to legalization advocates – though they could at least take solace in the fact that he did not flatly state that he opposes legalization.

“The answer is, no, I don't think that is a good strategy to grow our economy,” the president said. His answer prompted applause from the audience.

(White House press secretary Robert Gibbs later clarified Mr. Obama's position: "The president opposes the legalization of marijuana…he does not think that’s the right plan for America.” Gibbs declined to discuss the president's position on medical marijuana.)

Here's video of the president:

Read full post…

By CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen

Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is caught between two pincers, legal and political. What is likely to help his legal defense will hurt him politically. And what is likely to prolong his political career is likely to increase his chances of spending time in the pokey.

For example, if the governor’s defense attorneys were to assert some sort of insanity or incompetency defense to aid him in his criminal case — he went plumb out of his mind during the period in question and therefore had no criminal intent — the state’s Attorney General, Lisa Madigan, would be able to use such a defense in her effort to oust the governor from office under the Illinois constitutional provision that determines when a chief executive is unfit to lead. Madigan would be able to come before the Illinois Supreme Court and say: See? Even the governor himself concedes he isn’t up to par.

And if Blagojevich’s attorneys respond to the AG’s complaint last week by alleging that their guy was and is "in his right mind" — that he is fit to be governor under the state standard -- it will be hard later for them to use any sort of defense that focuses upon his intent at the time the taped conversations took place. In other words, eventually, the governor is going to have to choose which forum (legal or political) matters most to him. Now, to you and me this would be easy: we’d try to prevent ourselves from going to prison. We’ll see what Blagojevich does.

In the meantime, I have yet to see a defense theory about the case that solves this particular dilemma or otherwise offers a way out for the governor. Sure, his attorneys will argue that the taped conversations were obtained illegally. They will almost certainly lose that battle. And they will argue that it was all show and no go—that the governor’s bravado was bluster and not actionable. That too, is a non-starter.

I don’t for a minute buy into this week’s latest "conventional wisdom" that suggests the federal corruption case against the governor is weak because all he did was "talk" about accepting bribes. The federal prisons are littered with people who just "talked" about committing crimes—especially the sort of "white-collar" crimes we are dealing with here. And, in many cases, the "talk" from these convicted folks was a lot less clear and consistent and incriminating than are the off-the-charts wire-tapped hits allegedly coming from Blagojevich’s mouth.