Opinion
The traffic light idea of partially legalizing cannabis was a good one. But the prestigious project has turned into a bankruptcy. This reveals something fundamental about the coalition.
Bubatz was legal, the then new Ampel partners were so happy about the idea. But what could have been a signal of social awakening was negligently delayed. The coalition has turned its prestige project into a loser’s issue, a project that no longer gets anyone excited. The cannabis law is scheduled to be finalized this Friday afternoon. Then it says: Bubatz 2024 legal – and it doesn’t matter.
Because: Who cares? The republic is concerned about the economic downturn, the war in Ukraine and right-wing extremism – and not how many grams of grass will be allowed to be used and smoked in the future. For everyone over 18 (but preferably over 25). At home or in cannabis clubs. Within the permitted radius of so many meters. The fact that this cerebral impression could arise is bitter. Medically, socially, politically.
Everyone wanted the cannabis law. But …
Although the coalition partners, who are often diametrically opposed, exceptionally agreed on the issue of cannabis, practically from the start, they continued to revisit the issue again and again in order to really address every concern. Unfortunately, they have provided the constantly agitated warnings and admonishers with plenty of argumentative help. Until you lose your own sovereignty of interpretation.
The result: A month-long “Yes, but…”, a laborious process of combining many opinions that actually had the same point.
There is no question: the partial legalization of cannabis is a paradigm shift; the step needs to be carefully considered and discussed. However, the traffic light has turned a fundamental consensus into a controversy through its persistent and sometimes unnecessary wrangling over the supposed best solution. Judging by the headlines that each new backward role has produced, the cannabis law is now in the same league as actually controversial traffic light issues. The opposition thanks you by asking in a thieving routine: They’ll take care of smoking weed – but what about the really important issues? A no-brainer, but an effective one.
Now the traffic light coalition is pushing through the law if something doesn’t come up again. But it is far from over. The population’s reservations are now deep and a lot of trust has been lost. And the opposition knows about this mistrust.
That’s why some traffic light politicians are already dreading the next meeting of the Federal Council on March 22nd, in which the bag change will also be on the agenda. The cannabis law is not a law of consent but rather a law of objection. So the representatives of the states cannot fundamentally stop it. But they can object repeatedly. What if a majority blocks the cannabis law?
There is a risk of a stalemate that could potentially last for months. So there is plenty of time for the opposition to further discredit the matter – and also to encourage opponents of liberalization in the traffic light to perhaps write another fire letter against the law (like the busy SPD domestic politicians Sebastian Hartmann and Sebastian Fiedler).
Many people in the traffic lights just want the law off their backs. No wonder.
Source: Stern
I have been working in the news industry for over 6 years, first as a reporter and now as an editor. I have covered politics extensively, and my work has appeared in major newspapers and online news outlets around the world. In addition to my writing, I also contribute regularly to 24 Hours World.
