September 17, 2025 • 33 mins
Tired of feeling like your vote doesn’t matter? In this episode of Cannabis Enlightened, Dr. Leroy is joined by Chad Peace of the Independent Voter Project to break down how reforms like ranked choice and open primaries can make every ballot more meaningful. They dive into why broadening voter choice isn’t just about politics — it’s about opening the door for more voices, more nuance, and even more honest conversations around issues like cannabis.
Be sure to visit March and Ash to see the latest discounts for your favorite brands. Don’t forget to follow and subscribe at OlasMedia.com
Some notable moments from this episode:
02:41 – Chad introduces himself and his work with IVC Media)
03:27 – Dr. Leroy highlights the wide range of Olas Media topics)
03:34 – Chad jokes about “limited battery power”)
03:38 – Breaking down the reach of Olas Media)
04:06 – Introducing the issue of ranked choice voting)
04:40 – Chad explains the origins of the Independent Voter Project)
06:01 – Discussion of primaries leading into general elections)
06:12 – Red and blue districts leave independents with less impact)
07:26 – California’s nonpartisan primary system explained)
10:14 – Choice voting as a way to make every vote more meaningful)
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
S1 (00:29):
Hey, everybody. Leroy. Doctor Leroy here with cannabis enlightened, your
host coming to you with our dynamic program, Cannabis Enlightened.
And you know, we have topics that range from issues
about cannabis to issues around cannabis. And today we have
(00:54):
a topic that is very topical. I mean, it really
fits into what cannabis is all about. And some of
the things that we have talked about in prior episodes
that give people an idea of the structure of the
cannabis industry. And with me today to, uh, you know,
(01:18):
really focus on that is a gentleman that I have
known for, um, several, several months, several years, as a
matter of fact, here at the studio of Old Media.
And I want to mention that, as always, this program,
Cannabis Enlightened, is sponsored by March and ash and and
(01:42):
what I say and how I say it and making
it sound very professional, as always, are JC and Lena.
So thank you for them. And as I've always said
to you, that you know that I'm coming to you
from oldest media network, and this broadcast can be heard
over the oldest media network and Spotify. Today with me
(02:05):
is someone, as I mentioned, um, dynamic individual. Um, and
I've known him for a while. Chad Peace, who is
the president and partner of Oldest Media. And he's going
to talk to you about the structure of of oldest
media before we get into some more talk about choice voting. Now,
(02:31):
we have talked about choice voting already, but you know,
there are various facets of choice voting and how it
fits in to our government getting things changed. As a
matter of fact, uh, this may fold into, um, some cannabis.
(02:51):
Policy as we move along and down the road as
far as cannabis is concerned. So without any further ado,
I want to introduce and welcome Chad. Peace to cannabis
enlightened Chad, welcome. And you want to let the audience
know who you are and what you do?
S2 (03:10):
Well, I'm still trying to figure that out myself. Uh,
I'm Chad Peace. I'm the president of IVC media. Uh,
Olas media is a brand of ours. And Lena and JC,
as you mentioned, head up the production here and do
a great job. Uh, IVC media, we've been doing digital communications, um,
inside and outside of the public policy space for, you know,
(03:31):
almost 15 years now. Um, done some, you know, everything
from presidential campaigns to statewide initiatives. We've done a lot
of work in the reform space, like California's nonpartisan primary,
we help pass ranked choice voting statewide in Maine. And, um,
day to day. I'm I'm here in the office, and
sometimes we're working on issues related to cannabis. Sometimes we're
(03:54):
working on issues related to election reform.
S1 (03:56):
So you have a wide range of topics and issues that, um,
all this media focuses on.
S2 (04:03):
Wide, wide range, but, uh, you know, limited battery power.
S1 (04:07):
Uh, now, you may have to break that down to
me because I'm under the impression that all this media
has a very vast range.
S2 (04:19):
Yeah. We have I mean, we reach a lot of
people throughout, you know, through our different mechanisms. But, um,
you know, like anything else, um, you know, it's conversations
like this to that, that, that it takes to get
people to understand, uh, more about each other.
S1 (04:35):
Now, one of the things that has caught my interest is, uh, the,
the issue of choice voting, more choice voting, ranked choice voting. Mhm. Um,
I think I've even heard it called instant rank choice voting. Um,
and I know that you're also connected with the Independent
(04:57):
voter project, which, which you know, maybe you can talk
about that. Also, uh, before you get into before we
get into to more choice voting, what is the independent
voter project?
S2 (05:09):
Well, here I'll, I'll step back. I think that's a
good way to talk about how, you know, how does
this voting stuff relate to things like cannabis is the
reason the independent Voter Project was started in the first place,
a little over 20 years ago, was a belief by
many folks who had been in the legislature before Democrats
and Republicans, and thinking that the legislature is getting too partisan.
(05:32):
And I think what we've seen over the last decades,
it seems to get worse. Right. And so it doesn't
matter what policy you take, right? There's no nuance whether
it's an issue of immigration, it's open borders or throw
everybody out. If it's cannabis, it's legalize everything or don't. Right.
It's there's no substantive conversation. Say life and issues aren't
(05:56):
that simple. So the Independent Voters Project started with the
premise of saying, well, the the first the most important
thing is that for those of you who are not, um,
don't pay as close attention to politics, and I don't
blame you if you don't. Um, the first round of
the election process is called the primary elections, right? Right.
So in the primary elections, you usually elect somebody that
(06:20):
if you're in a Republican district or a Democratic district,
you've heard those terms, right. The person who wins in
the primary is going to be the representative.
S1 (06:30):
And move on.
S2 (06:31):
Right.
S1 (06:32):
To the general election.
S2 (06:33):
And win, because we have red districts and blue districts. Right.
S1 (06:37):
So which which means Democrats and Republicans, right. Okay.
S2 (06:41):
Right. So if you just think about that, simple. Like
it's pretty accepted among political, you know, coverage and philosophies
that we have red and blue districts. So what does
that mean? It means if you're a voter and you're
not part of the red team in a red district
or the blue team in a blue district, when do
(07:01):
you have a meaningful vote? When does your vote ever matter?
S1 (07:04):
Hmm. I think, like most voters, it it matters whenever
you go to the polls and vote. Mhm. Is that
not true?
S2 (07:14):
Well, I'd like to think so. But if you're going
into a race where you know the Republicans are guaranteed
to win because it's going to overwhelmingly Republican district and
vice versa. Most people would argue that it's it's a
you're casting a vote, but is it? The question is
what is meaningful? So the Independent voter Project was started
(07:36):
this first primary. Its first goal was to create the
nonpartisan primaries in California. So that's why California, like just
a few other states like Washington, were the only states
that it doesn't matter whether you've registered with a party
or not. We have what are called voter nominated candidates.
S1 (07:55):
Okay.
S2 (07:55):
So everybody in the state gets a primary election ballot.
Everybody in the state can vote for whatever candidate they want, right?
So every voter has an equally meaningful opportunity to determine
the outcome. Um, it's really that simple. Now you'll get
questions about, wait, what do you mean? I wasn't allowed
to vote for Donald Trump in the presidential primary because
(08:19):
I wasn't a Republican, or I couldn't vote for Bernie
Sanders because I wasn't a Democrat.
S1 (08:23):
Right.
S2 (08:24):
Presidential elections are a different animal. Um, they're integrated with,
you know, the federal elections and the presidential primaries, which
is a whole different conversation. But but in terms of
all the rest of the elections in California, they're all
what we call nonpartisan voter nominated offices.
S1 (08:41):
Which means it doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or
a Republican.
S2 (08:44):
Right. And you compare that to a state like new
Jersey that has closed primaries, right? They have closed primaries
with an under 10% turnout, and they had zero competitive
general election races. So everybody already knew who was going
to win before the general election. So if you go
an under 10% turnout in the primary and then you
(09:05):
split that up amongst, say, it was 50, 50, 50% Republicans, Democrats,
right now you got 5%, and then the winner could
be somebody won by a plurality. So you got 35%
of the vote in a field of five. Just crunch
the numbers like you have people being elected representing entire states, um,
(09:28):
large districts where they they really only got the votes
of like 2% of the electorate. Wow. Right. And that's
the reality of our system. Then we wonder, well, why
is everything so divisive? And so, you know, why is
everything so, you know, strident and black and white, right?
It's because you need a you just need to get
(09:50):
that hard core base of voters to come out and
vote for you and the voters in the middle that
don't either don't vote or don't vote all the time.
They're not registered with the party. They maybe want to
vote for a Democrat, sometimes a Republican. Other times, those votes, frankly,
are a lot less meaningful in terms of winning an
(10:11):
election seat.
S1 (10:12):
Well, you know, I often hear people say, well, you know,
I am registered to vote, but why should I vote?
It's not going to matter anyway. I mean, the the
it doesn't matter anyway attitude, um, is pervasive, I find.
S2 (10:29):
Unfortunate.
S1 (10:30):
So so is is the the notion of, um, choice
voting or more choice voting. Is that aimed at, you know,
kind of tearing down that attitude of, well, my vote
doesn't count.
S2 (10:43):
Absolutely. I mean, that's one of the critical factors. So
you have, you know, choice voting, which I know folks
are working on more choice instant runoff. Like forget the confusion.
Just simplify it. Okay. Yes. There's nuances. There's differences amongst them.
But you kind of think, broadly speaking, nonpartisan primaries, open primaries.
That's one that's one issue. And I'll frame it in
(11:04):
the way that I believe it should be framed is
like asking the question, should every voter, regardless of party,
have the right to participate at the first stage of
the election process?
S1 (11:15):
Ah, I would say yes.
S2 (11:17):
So if you say yes, you have to be for
open primaries, which means you have to be against the
primary system and several dozen states. Right? So understand several
dozen states, you do not have the right to vote
unless you join a political party. And actually, the Third
Circuit Court of Appeals has said if you want to
vote in the first stage of the election, just join
a party. Personally, I think that's offensive to our First
(11:40):
Amendment right of non-association that we have in this country.
But that's a battle that needs to be fought and
hopefully it'll be won sometime. So issue one, can you
treat every voter the same at every stage of the process?
I think this what you're talking about between choice more choice,
instant runoff. All we could go down the line. There's
(12:00):
about 5000 other ones of different ways of counting go
to do with the reason you hear the choice word
more is is options, right? Where even in California, look,
there's unintended consequences of the nonpartisan primary that independent voter
project authored in California. Right? Because you only get two
candidates on the general election ballot to limit your choices
(12:21):
to two. True. But election reform has to be made
in stages, right? And the we, the independent voter project,
believed the most important thing was allowing everybody to vote now. Right.
At that point, okay, you allow three, four, five, six
people to go onto the general election. How do you
make sure you get a majority winner? Right. The most
(12:44):
the simplest way to do it is to have two. Right.
Because then you got to have a majority. Sure. Okay.
Ranked choice. Instant runoff choice. All these other things are
what give you the ability to have more than two
candidates on the ballot and still find a majority supported winner, right?
(13:06):
So when you do that by ranking. So you know,
if you have five people on the ballot, you can say, hey,
I vote Joe one, Amy two, Fred three, you know,
and so on. Sure. And then there are different ways
of calculating those votes. I mean, they just ran an
election right now in New York City is using ranked
(13:26):
choice voting for exactly right. Yeah. Um, but to your point,
how many people maybe wouldn't have voted at all if
it was just, you know, two people and they didn't? Right. Like,
really either one of them? Yeah. Right. And maybe they'll
come out to vote just to vote for their person,
even if their person can't win. But now the third, fourth,
(13:47):
fifth place candidates are more important. And what they have
to say is more important, because if they get a vote,
they're not just playing spoiler and taking a vote away
from the the two party dichotomy. right? Those two parties,
those two candidates that ultimately win, need to get the second,
(14:09):
you know, the second place preference or third place preference
of people who support other candidates, right? Okay. So no
longer can you say everybody's the worst person in the world,
and I'm the only person that can solve everybody's problems, right?
Because then the people who support other people aren't going
to vote you second. Right. So you have to listen
(14:31):
beyond your narrow base. I mean, you've seen cases in
in places that have ranked choice voting where, um, you
have candidates going to other party meetings and going, like
going with each other and literally asking, saying, can I
be your second choice? Right.
S1 (14:51):
Okay.
S2 (14:51):
And so those are all systems. And look, there's there's pros,
there's cons, there's unintended consequences. There's there's all kinds of
nuance within there, but at its core, I believe every
all these efforts are trying to create a process. Going
back to what I was originally discussing, how do we
make every vote more meaningful?
S1 (15:14):
Right. So and, you know, there's a word you used
a bit ago that was options. And it sounds like
what more choice voting. Choice voting. Ranked choice. It sounds
like this method is providing the voter with more options
(15:35):
as opposed to just you've got you've got, you know,
choice one or choice two A or B, that's it. Which,
which maybe discourages some people from even going to the polls,
but with options, you know, if a person doesn't get,
I guess, 51% the majority, if they don't get the majority,
(15:58):
There's a chance that the second person might get.
S2 (16:03):
That your second choice. Like, even if your first choice
doesn't win, your second choice might your second choice vote
might help a candidate win, right? And so you may
not end up with your number one candidate, but you
can end up with somebody that you're satisfied with seeing
as your representative. And that's the theory behind it.
S1 (16:23):
So this sounds like what people that support choice voting
more choice voting, all of that. They've decided that, um,
the current voting method is just not working. It's absolutely
not working. Um, because of the candidates we get or
(16:44):
because of the policies that they support.
S2 (16:47):
Well, I think it it's probably even broader than that.
It's really just that the system is kind of institutionalized,
even here, even here in San Diego. And, you know,
we have a we have nonpartisan elections, but everybody knows
they're really, you know, the partisan forces and stuff that
are behind. And I hesitate to even talk about it
in too much of a pejorative way, because I don't
(17:10):
even blame the special interests for running the campaigns. I mean,
it's trying to get their folks to win an office, right?
But the reality is, there's folks with political power and
influence and money that have so much power, influence and
money over, like the everyday voter that the two candidates
that get go on to the general election are really
(17:32):
predetermined by the pool of special interest and money in,
in San Diego. And that's not unique to San Diego.
It's it's it's everywhere.
S1 (17:40):
It's all over the country, right.
S2 (17:41):
Like, you know, to have somebody come out, um, you know,
outside of the political establishment and be able to, you know,
come out of nowhere and get into the, you know, very,
very difficult, if not impossible. And I think what, you know,
these kind of ranked choice voting proposals and getting more, um,
(18:01):
candidates on the general election ballot when more people are
paying attention, what it's intended to do is open up
the conversation. Right. I actually believe that election reform has
much less to do with who gets elected, right? I
think the very same people can may get elected under
a good election or election reform, a good, solid, nonpartisan
(18:22):
election reform. The difference comes with how they behave to
get elected and after they get elected. Because if you
take away the incentive, that is, hey, I just need
to appeal to these people. And as long as I
don't lose them, I'm in office. Right. That's a double
edged sword, because sometimes, you know, my dad growing up
(18:43):
used to always tell me. He goes, you know, the politician.
The best politicians are the ones that can go to
their friends and say no, right? And, uh.
S1 (18:52):
So that our audience has clear, you know and the
cannabis enlightened has transparency. Your father is who.
S2 (19:00):
My father is, uh, former Senator Steve Peace. Uh, he
was in, uh, political office for 22 years. He's been
out for quite a while. Out and happy and glad he's,
you know, um, you know, he was he was a
longtime Democrat. He used to always joke that both parties
wanted him to switch.
S1 (19:17):
So.
S2 (19:18):
Um, you know, I really got an appreciation for kind
of what, a, you know, small I independent, which I've
always said the independent voter project is it's a small
I there's Democrats that are independents, there's Republicans, independents. It's
really just anybody that, you know, thinks for themselves or
doesn't just walk, walk lockstep in the party with the
party because the party said to do something.
S1 (19:39):
So you've had an upfront kind of like a bird's
eye view of the political system, almost, you know, your
entire life, or at least the part of your life
where you grew up, um, you know, while your father
was in politics. And while you were at home. Um.
Do you, because of that, do you feel like, uh,
choice voting is an evolution of the democratic process?
S2 (20:05):
Um, yeah, I think, uh, I think our voting system
is continuously evolving. Um, I mean, look, we started the country.
African Americans didn't have the right to vote. Women didn't
have the right to vote. Right. And we, you know,
we've we've gone on I think non-partisan primaries are a progression. Right. Um,
we didn't even have primary elections until the, you know,
(20:26):
the great Progressive ERA when, you know, it was a
voter backlash of saying, hey, these party bosses are picking
the candidates and, you know, smoke filled rooms and the
voters don't actually have a choice. So we implemented primary
elections in order to bring voters into the process and
make it more transparent. Right. And now what we're saying is,
you know, these primary elections, there's been, um, they've erected walls.
(20:49):
They've made all kinds of barriers to participation on, on,
on competition in the primaries and stuff. And we have
such low voter turnout. We have closed primaries that we
need to reform that system. Right. That was a voter
enacted reform for the most part. Right. And now it's
time to reform it again. Um, so all these things,
I think, are just part of the development of our democracy, um,
(21:13):
and hopefully improvements.
S1 (21:16):
And you feel that that choice voting is, is one
of the reforms that we can implement into voting, um,
that will give the average American, the average citizen, the
average person who is registered to vote more of a
say in their government.
S2 (21:34):
I think a more meaningful vote and a more right,
a more representative system. Right. So, uh, it's not a
silver bullet, and all of a sudden we're going to
have a perfect government tomorrow and stuff. But I do
believe that it forces accountability across a broader segment of
(21:54):
the electorate, and that that more segments of the electorate
become important rather than just.
S1 (22:02):
Right.
S2 (22:02):
Basically, the two party bases that we have now.
S1 (22:06):
Right. Now, you mentioned New York, New York, um, where
they're having a an election for mayor and they're under
choice voting. Um, I think they have about five, seven candidates,
so they'll be able to rank those candidates.
S2 (22:22):
Right.
S1 (22:23):
Is there any place closer to New York that choice
voting is being used? Maybe some somewhere in California?
S2 (22:32):
Well, um, Oakland and San Francisco use ranked choice voting. Um,
the state of Maine uses it throughout the whole state. Um,
you know what's different in New York? That, you know,
I would have some you know, I actually wrote an
article talking about, you know.
S1 (22:50):
I want to get to that too.
S2 (22:51):
So New York right now is exploring open primaries, but
New York has closed primaries, and they're only implemented ranked
choice voting for the primaries. So if you're an independent
voter in New York, you don't even get to see
what ranked choice voting is like because you're not even
allowed to vote in the primaries in New York. Which
is why I take this out. This isn't a partisan.
(23:12):
It's really not a partisan. I think the ranked choice
voting has become very partisan in the electorate, because the
Republicans have seen it happen in places like Alaska, where
they didn't get the candidate they wanted elected under it.
And so they're like, oh, we're anti ranked choice voting.
The fact is, one of the most popular Republican governors,
Glenn Youngkin, he was elected in the Republican caucus. You
(23:34):
know how they you know how they selected him as
the nominee.
S1 (23:37):
Okay.
S2 (23:38):
Because the Republican caucus used ranked choice voting, and he
won on, like, the fifth round of the ballot, right?
They actually use it in some of their courses. So
they internally their party recognizes that there's good thing. And
don't get me wrong, just like anything else, you got
to implement it right. You got to do it right. Um,
(23:59):
you know, there's lots of nuances that can be in look,
in New York, they implemented it, but they implemented it
in a primary. Now, if the Democratic, uh, ranked choice
voting system produces a a majority, from the majority's view,
an unpopular candidate, what you're going to have is three, four,
(24:19):
five candidates in the general election running against each other
without ranked choice voting. So then what is New York
going to get?
S1 (24:29):
Well.
S2 (24:29):
They're going to get a mayor elected with 30 something
percent of the vote.
S1 (24:32):
Right. Exactly.
S2 (24:33):
Which is not a majority doesn't have doesn't have the
support of a majority of the city. Right. So But
from you can also say from election reform perspective that
in the arc of history, this experience is important because
it's educated the electorate. It's it's spurred this conversation we're
(24:53):
having today. Right.
S1 (24:55):
So yeah, so is it your belief then that um,
and belief feeling, um, that folks should be more supportive of,
of choice voting in primaries and general elections, or should
they just be looking at choice voting in a general election?
(25:17):
Is it across the board?
S2 (25:18):
I'm far from suggesting that I have the perfect solution, right?
And I think the only time's going to tell is
by use, you know, stuff. Um, what the. The more
choice coalition I've been a part of, I think has
put together a very good proposal which basically says right
now we have this nonpartisan primary, Everybody runs in the
(25:39):
top two candidates go to the general election. Okay. Right.
Our proposal says don't change anything about the primary. Just
advance five instead of two. Okay. We're not using ranked
choice voting yet. The primary. We're just. But let's advance five, right.
So if you can build up enough of a following
and make enough of a splash, or you should be
(26:00):
able to come into the top five, then in the
general election when twice as many people are voting, then
you use ranked choice voting. And there's five people to
choose from. Right. You have five you can five rankings
and five candidates to choose from. Right. Put them in
whatever order you want. And that's what has been proposed.
(26:22):
And if less than five people run, you eliminate the
primary altogether. Why do you need it? Save some taxpayer money. Right.
S1 (26:30):
And primaries or generals or either one.
S2 (26:34):
I'm saying if five or less run, you can just
eliminate the primary altogether, and you just run the general
election because you don't need it.
S1 (26:41):
And it sounds like if we eliminate the primary, that's
going to save a lot of money.
S2 (26:44):
That'll save. Yeah. Save a decent amount of money. Right.
So you also have a viewpoint which, you know, I
haven't embraced others do of just. Okay, then why don't
we just get rid of primaries, right.
S1 (26:56):
I was just thinking, there's.
S2 (26:57):
A lot there's a lot of people that advocate for that. Um,
my argument is, and I don't know. I don't know
that I'm right. I feel pretty confident I am that, um,
you know, when you have look at New York, when
you have, I think it's 12 candidates, right? Or you
have 12, 13, 18 candidates. Right. But you're the voters
can't you can't possibly wrap your head. I mean, I'm
(27:18):
pretty politically engaged and active. How do you how do
you credibly rank 18 people? How does how do you
make get 18 people to have enough space on the
newspaper page and, you know, on the press coverage, right.
Is that it's my belief you have to have some
winnowing factor. Right, and you want to make it as
fair as possible, does it have to be a primary?
(27:40):
Could it be signature? I don't have the answers to
that question. Right. But unless you limit the candidate field
to a discernible number like 4 or 5, where you
can't marginalize somebody, you can't. Some of the big power
brokers can't game the field and run four candidates that
are really, you know, all all really working for you.
(28:03):
You know what I mean? There's there's all kinds of
games that can be played. Is that the fairest way
to do it, I believe, is to limit the candidate
field to a number that people can wrap their head
around and that, you know, nobody can ignore and, and
have the same number of ranking spots as there are candidates.
S3 (28:23):
We're gonna put a pause in the conversation and we'll
be back right after this.
S4 (28:28):
Content creators ready to take your podcast from something you
just thinking about doing to making it a production reality.
Look no further than Ola's Media, San Diego's premier podcast network.
Located in the heart of Mission Valley.
S5 (28:41):
At Ola's media, we've got everything you need to produce
high quality podcasts with professional producers, state of the art facilities,
and talented graphic and sound designers will bring your vision
to life.
S4 (28:52):
Join our lineup of dynamic shows like Dear San Diego,
where we dive into the city's heartbeat beyond the doors
your go to for real estate and housing insights. Cannabis
enlightened exploring the evolving cannabis industry.
S5 (29:04):
Plus, attack of the Killer Tomatoes brings a fresh, fun
take on Newton's border. Masters shines a light on the
complexities of the US-Mexico border. No matter the topic, Ola's
is your creative home. Even our clients say so.
S4 (29:17):
Ready to bring your podcast to life? Let Ola's media
be your partner in production. Visit Ola's Media.com and get
started today.
S5 (29:26):
Let us amplify your brand.
S6 (29:32):
Alas media.
S3 (29:40):
And now here's more from our guests and our hosts.
S1 (29:42):
Would this be a move to have folks look at
candidates from the standpoint of their issues, or does it
go back to, um, name recognition or who I like,
or does that even matter?
S2 (29:51):
It's all it's all it's all of that. You know, frankly,
I think we totally underestimate how many people just vote
for the person they just like. They'll vote for people
they like. They don't agree with some, some a lot
of people. Right. Right now we have a very kind
of issue based voting camps, right? Everything's been put into
issues and stuff, and that you have the partisan bases
that are going to vote on those issues and stuff.
But I think we underestimate how many people want to
vote for somebody they like. Right. I'm electing you to
figure out all these issues and negotiate this and do that. Right. Um,
(30:12):
so I think it's a combination of all of that.
S1 (30:15):
Do you think as we move forward that, um, more
choice voting or choice voting is going to be meaningful
in the cannabis industry? Um, you know, it's federally legal.
Would there be a room or space for folks to, uh,
you know, implement or look at more choice voting in
terms of making cannabis legal across the board.
S2 (30:33):
I don't know if they'll be that direct of a connection,
but as I alluded to earlier, I think it would
create a better discussion about cannabis because, right, right now
you get a lot of, oh, are they pro or
are they against cannabis for cannabis or are they against cannabis? Right.
The whole point of more choice and having a, you know,
opening up the conversation, having different things is it allows
for nuance, right? Um, you can be pro cannabis, but
also want to regulate stuff within the space. You can
be against cannabis, but understand that there's value of having
(30:55):
it legalized and regulated. Right. So but those nuanced positions
don't have a place in today's political landscape. And so
I think the connection isn't quite as direct. Um, but
it's a natural consequence of having a system where you
have more voices and you have to appeal to more perspectives,
that you then have to have more nuanced positions.
S1 (31:09):
Gotcha, gotcha. You know, um, Chad, this has been very interesting.
I mean, you know, you're a very engaging, um, guest
with respect to almost anything, especially as we're talking politics and, um,
different ways to have your vote count. Um, is there
any way for folks to get in touch with you
and maybe, you know, want to ask you some further questions? Um, or,
you know, just pick your brain.
S2 (31:26):
I would visit independent voter Project.org. You can check out
our news website. We do a lot of coverage on
the cannabis issue at IBM. Or you can email me
at Chad at us directly.
S1 (31:34):
And what about you mentioned the article. I read your article.
I really like it. How would folks be able to
define that article?
S2 (31:40):
If you go to IBM or you just Google Chad
piece New York Primary and it should come up.
S1 (31:43):
All right. All right. Listen, thank you very much, Chad,
for being the guest on cannabis, enlightening and talking about
voting and kind of bringing it back home to cannabis issues.
We really appreciate your time that you spent with us.
S2 (31:53):
I appreciate you having me here. Anybody that wants to
sit through and talk about election reform, I'm happy.
S7 (31:56):
To do it.
S1 (31:57):
Well, thank you very much. Appreciate it. And I appreciate
all of you, cannabis listeners, for being with me on
another episode of Cannabis Enlightened. Remember this episode and all
the episodes of Cannabis Enlightened can be heard on the
Media Broadcasting Network. And if you'd like to reach out
to me with a comment just to say hi or,
you know, I really like that guest you had today,
Chad Pease, you can reach me at Doctor Leroy cannabis.
Cannabis enlightened. Com that's Doctor Leroy at Cannabis Enlightened. Com
(32:20):
thanks again for listening. And remember, as I always say,
knowledge is power.
Hey, everybody. Leroy. Doctor Leroy here with cannabis enlightened, your
host coming to you with our dynamic program, Cannabis Enlightened.
And you know, we have topics that range from issues
about cannabis to issues around cannabis. And today we have
(00:54):
a topic that is very topical. I mean, it really
fits into what cannabis is all about. And some of
the things that we have talked about in prior episodes
that give people an idea of the structure of the
cannabis industry. And with me today to, uh, you know,
(01:18):
really focus on that is a gentleman that I have
known for, um, several, several months, several years, as a
matter of fact, here at the studio of Old Media.
And I want to mention that, as always, this program,
Cannabis Enlightened, is sponsored by March and ash and and
(01:42):
what I say and how I say it and making
it sound very professional, as always, are JC and Lena.
So thank you for them. And as I've always said
to you, that you know that I'm coming to you
from oldest media network, and this broadcast can be heard
over the oldest media network and Spotify. Today with me
(02:05):
is someone, as I mentioned, um, dynamic individual. Um, and
I've known him for a while. Chad Peace, who is
the president and partner of Oldest Media. And he's going
to talk to you about the structure of of oldest
media before we get into some more talk about choice voting. Now,
(02:31):
we have talked about choice voting already, but you know,
there are various facets of choice voting and how it
fits in to our government getting things changed. As a
matter of fact, uh, this may fold into, um, some cannabis.
(02:51):
Policy as we move along and down the road as
far as cannabis is concerned. So without any further ado,
I want to introduce and welcome Chad. Peace to cannabis
enlightened Chad, welcome. And you want to let the audience
know who you are and what you do?
S2 (03:10):
Well, I'm still trying to figure that out myself. Uh,
I'm Chad Peace. I'm the president of IVC media. Uh,
Olas media is a brand of ours. And Lena and JC,
as you mentioned, head up the production here and do
a great job. Uh, IVC media, we've been doing digital communications, um,
inside and outside of the public policy space for, you know,
(03:31):
almost 15 years now. Um, done some, you know, everything
from presidential campaigns to statewide initiatives. We've done a lot
of work in the reform space, like California's nonpartisan primary,
we help pass ranked choice voting statewide in Maine. And, um,
day to day. I'm I'm here in the office, and
sometimes we're working on issues related to cannabis. Sometimes we're
(03:54):
working on issues related to election reform.
S1 (03:56):
So you have a wide range of topics and issues that, um,
all this media focuses on.
S2 (04:03):
Wide, wide range, but, uh, you know, limited battery power.
S1 (04:07):
Uh, now, you may have to break that down to
me because I'm under the impression that all this media
has a very vast range.
S2 (04:19):
Yeah. We have I mean, we reach a lot of
people throughout, you know, through our different mechanisms. But, um,
you know, like anything else, um, you know, it's conversations
like this to that, that, that it takes to get
people to understand, uh, more about each other.
S1 (04:35):
Now, one of the things that has caught my interest is, uh, the,
the issue of choice voting, more choice voting, ranked choice voting. Mhm. Um,
I think I've even heard it called instant rank choice voting. Um,
and I know that you're also connected with the Independent
(04:57):
voter project, which, which you know, maybe you can talk
about that. Also, uh, before you get into before we
get into to more choice voting, what is the independent
voter project?
S2 (05:09):
Well, here I'll, I'll step back. I think that's a
good way to talk about how, you know, how does
this voting stuff relate to things like cannabis is the
reason the independent Voter Project was started in the first place,
a little over 20 years ago, was a belief by
many folks who had been in the legislature before Democrats
and Republicans, and thinking that the legislature is getting too partisan.
(05:32):
And I think what we've seen over the last decades,
it seems to get worse. Right. And so it doesn't
matter what policy you take, right? There's no nuance whether
it's an issue of immigration, it's open borders or throw
everybody out. If it's cannabis, it's legalize everything or don't. Right.
It's there's no substantive conversation. Say life and issues aren't
(05:56):
that simple. So the Independent Voters Project started with the
premise of saying, well, the the first the most important
thing is that for those of you who are not, um,
don't pay as close attention to politics, and I don't
blame you if you don't. Um, the first round of
the election process is called the primary elections, right? Right.
So in the primary elections, you usually elect somebody that
(06:20):
if you're in a Republican district or a Democratic district,
you've heard those terms, right. The person who wins in
the primary is going to be the representative.
S1 (06:30):
And move on.
S2 (06:31):
Right.
S1 (06:32):
To the general election.
S2 (06:33):
And win, because we have red districts and blue districts. Right.
S1 (06:37):
So which which means Democrats and Republicans, right. Okay.
S2 (06:41):
Right. So if you just think about that, simple. Like
it's pretty accepted among political, you know, coverage and philosophies
that we have red and blue districts. So what does
that mean? It means if you're a voter and you're
not part of the red team in a red district
or the blue team in a blue district, when do
(07:01):
you have a meaningful vote? When does your vote ever matter?
S1 (07:04):
Hmm. I think, like most voters, it it matters whenever
you go to the polls and vote. Mhm. Is that
not true?
S2 (07:14):
Well, I'd like to think so. But if you're going
into a race where you know the Republicans are guaranteed
to win because it's going to overwhelmingly Republican district and
vice versa. Most people would argue that it's it's a
you're casting a vote, but is it? The question is
what is meaningful? So the Independent voter Project was started
(07:36):
this first primary. Its first goal was to create the
nonpartisan primaries in California. So that's why California, like just
a few other states like Washington, were the only states
that it doesn't matter whether you've registered with a party
or not. We have what are called voter nominated candidates.
S1 (07:55):
Okay.
S2 (07:55):
So everybody in the state gets a primary election ballot.
Everybody in the state can vote for whatever candidate they want, right?
So every voter has an equally meaningful opportunity to determine
the outcome. Um, it's really that simple. Now you'll get
questions about, wait, what do you mean? I wasn't allowed
to vote for Donald Trump in the presidential primary because
(08:19):
I wasn't a Republican, or I couldn't vote for Bernie
Sanders because I wasn't a Democrat.
S1 (08:23):
Right.
S2 (08:24):
Presidential elections are a different animal. Um, they're integrated with,
you know, the federal elections and the presidential primaries, which
is a whole different conversation. But but in terms of
all the rest of the elections in California, they're all
what we call nonpartisan voter nominated offices.
S1 (08:41):
Which means it doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or
a Republican.
S2 (08:44):
Right. And you compare that to a state like new
Jersey that has closed primaries, right? They have closed primaries
with an under 10% turnout, and they had zero competitive
general election races. So everybody already knew who was going
to win before the general election. So if you go
an under 10% turnout in the primary and then you
(09:05):
split that up amongst, say, it was 50, 50, 50% Republicans, Democrats,
right now you got 5%, and then the winner could
be somebody won by a plurality. So you got 35%
of the vote in a field of five. Just crunch
the numbers like you have people being elected representing entire states, um,
(09:28):
large districts where they they really only got the votes
of like 2% of the electorate. Wow. Right. And that's
the reality of our system. Then we wonder, well, why
is everything so divisive? And so, you know, why is
everything so, you know, strident and black and white, right?
It's because you need a you just need to get
(09:50):
that hard core base of voters to come out and
vote for you and the voters in the middle that
don't either don't vote or don't vote all the time.
They're not registered with the party. They maybe want to
vote for a Democrat, sometimes a Republican. Other times, those votes, frankly,
are a lot less meaningful in terms of winning an
(10:11):
election seat.
S1 (10:12):
Well, you know, I often hear people say, well, you know,
I am registered to vote, but why should I vote?
It's not going to matter anyway. I mean, the the
it doesn't matter anyway attitude, um, is pervasive, I find.
S2 (10:29):
Unfortunate.
S1 (10:30):
So so is is the the notion of, um, choice
voting or more choice voting. Is that aimed at, you know,
kind of tearing down that attitude of, well, my vote
doesn't count.
S2 (10:43):
Absolutely. I mean, that's one of the critical factors. So
you have, you know, choice voting, which I know folks
are working on more choice instant runoff. Like forget the confusion.
Just simplify it. Okay. Yes. There's nuances. There's differences amongst them.
But you kind of think, broadly speaking, nonpartisan primaries, open primaries.
That's one that's one issue. And I'll frame it in
(11:04):
the way that I believe it should be framed is
like asking the question, should every voter, regardless of party,
have the right to participate at the first stage of
the election process?
S1 (11:15):
Ah, I would say yes.
S2 (11:17):
So if you say yes, you have to be for
open primaries, which means you have to be against the
primary system and several dozen states. Right? So understand several
dozen states, you do not have the right to vote
unless you join a political party. And actually, the Third
Circuit Court of Appeals has said if you want to
vote in the first stage of the election, just join
a party. Personally, I think that's offensive to our First
(11:40):
Amendment right of non-association that we have in this country.
But that's a battle that needs to be fought and
hopefully it'll be won sometime. So issue one, can you
treat every voter the same at every stage of the process?
I think this what you're talking about between choice more choice,
instant runoff. All we could go down the line. There's
(12:00):
about 5000 other ones of different ways of counting go
to do with the reason you hear the choice word
more is is options, right? Where even in California, look,
there's unintended consequences of the nonpartisan primary that independent voter
project authored in California. Right? Because you only get two
candidates on the general election ballot to limit your choices
(12:21):
to two. True. But election reform has to be made
in stages, right? And the we, the independent voter project,
believed the most important thing was allowing everybody to vote now. Right.
At that point, okay, you allow three, four, five, six
people to go onto the general election. How do you
make sure you get a majority winner? Right. The most
(12:44):
the simplest way to do it is to have two. Right.
Because then you got to have a majority. Sure. Okay.
Ranked choice. Instant runoff choice. All these other things are
what give you the ability to have more than two
candidates on the ballot and still find a majority supported winner, right?
(13:06):
So when you do that by ranking. So you know,
if you have five people on the ballot, you can say, hey,
I vote Joe one, Amy two, Fred three, you know,
and so on. Sure. And then there are different ways
of calculating those votes. I mean, they just ran an
election right now in New York City is using ranked
(13:26):
choice voting for exactly right. Yeah. Um, but to your point,
how many people maybe wouldn't have voted at all if
it was just, you know, two people and they didn't? Right. Like,
really either one of them? Yeah. Right. And maybe they'll
come out to vote just to vote for their person,
even if their person can't win. But now the third, fourth,
(13:47):
fifth place candidates are more important. And what they have
to say is more important, because if they get a vote,
they're not just playing spoiler and taking a vote away
from the the two party dichotomy. right? Those two parties,
those two candidates that ultimately win, need to get the second,
(14:09):
you know, the second place preference or third place preference
of people who support other candidates, right? Okay. So no
longer can you say everybody's the worst person in the world,
and I'm the only person that can solve everybody's problems, right?
Because then the people who support other people aren't going
to vote you second. Right. So you have to listen
(14:31):
beyond your narrow base. I mean, you've seen cases in
in places that have ranked choice voting where, um, you
have candidates going to other party meetings and going, like
going with each other and literally asking, saying, can I
be your second choice? Right.
S1 (14:51):
Okay.
S2 (14:51):
And so those are all systems. And look, there's there's pros,
there's cons, there's unintended consequences. There's there's all kinds of
nuance within there, but at its core, I believe every
all these efforts are trying to create a process. Going
back to what I was originally discussing, how do we
make every vote more meaningful?
S1 (15:14):
Right. So and, you know, there's a word you used
a bit ago that was options. And it sounds like
what more choice voting. Choice voting. Ranked choice. It sounds
like this method is providing the voter with more options
(15:35):
as opposed to just you've got you've got, you know,
choice one or choice two A or B, that's it. Which,
which maybe discourages some people from even going to the polls,
but with options, you know, if a person doesn't get,
I guess, 51% the majority, if they don't get the majority,
(15:58):
There's a chance that the second person might get.
S2 (16:03):
That your second choice. Like, even if your first choice
doesn't win, your second choice might your second choice vote
might help a candidate win, right? And so you may
not end up with your number one candidate, but you
can end up with somebody that you're satisfied with seeing
as your representative. And that's the theory behind it.
S1 (16:23):
So this sounds like what people that support choice voting
more choice voting, all of that. They've decided that, um,
the current voting method is just not working. It's absolutely
not working. Um, because of the candidates we get or
(16:44):
because of the policies that they support.
S2 (16:47):
Well, I think it it's probably even broader than that.
It's really just that the system is kind of institutionalized,
even here, even here in San Diego. And, you know,
we have a we have nonpartisan elections, but everybody knows
they're really, you know, the partisan forces and stuff that
are behind. And I hesitate to even talk about it
in too much of a pejorative way, because I don't
(17:10):
even blame the special interests for running the campaigns. I mean,
it's trying to get their folks to win an office, right?
But the reality is, there's folks with political power and
influence and money that have so much power, influence and
money over, like the everyday voter that the two candidates
that get go on to the general election are really
(17:32):
predetermined by the pool of special interest and money in,
in San Diego. And that's not unique to San Diego.
It's it's it's everywhere.
S1 (17:40):
It's all over the country, right.
S2 (17:41):
Like, you know, to have somebody come out, um, you know,
outside of the political establishment and be able to, you know,
come out of nowhere and get into the, you know, very,
very difficult, if not impossible. And I think what, you know,
these kind of ranked choice voting proposals and getting more, um,
(18:01):
candidates on the general election ballot when more people are
paying attention, what it's intended to do is open up
the conversation. Right. I actually believe that election reform has
much less to do with who gets elected, right? I
think the very same people can may get elected under
a good election or election reform, a good, solid, nonpartisan
(18:22):
election reform. The difference comes with how they behave to
get elected and after they get elected. Because if you
take away the incentive, that is, hey, I just need
to appeal to these people. And as long as I
don't lose them, I'm in office. Right. That's a double
edged sword, because sometimes, you know, my dad growing up
(18:43):
used to always tell me. He goes, you know, the politician.
The best politicians are the ones that can go to
their friends and say no, right? And, uh.
S1 (18:52):
So that our audience has clear, you know and the
cannabis enlightened has transparency. Your father is who.
S2 (19:00):
My father is, uh, former Senator Steve Peace. Uh, he
was in, uh, political office for 22 years. He's been
out for quite a while. Out and happy and glad he's,
you know, um, you know, he was he was a
longtime Democrat. He used to always joke that both parties
wanted him to switch.
S1 (19:17):
So.
S2 (19:18):
Um, you know, I really got an appreciation for kind
of what, a, you know, small I independent, which I've
always said the independent voter project is it's a small
I there's Democrats that are independents, there's Republicans, independents. It's
really just anybody that, you know, thinks for themselves or
doesn't just walk, walk lockstep in the party with the
party because the party said to do something.
S1 (19:39):
So you've had an upfront kind of like a bird's
eye view of the political system, almost, you know, your
entire life, or at least the part of your life
where you grew up, um, you know, while your father
was in politics. And while you were at home. Um.
Do you, because of that, do you feel like, uh,
choice voting is an evolution of the democratic process?
S2 (20:05):
Um, yeah, I think, uh, I think our voting system
is continuously evolving. Um, I mean, look, we started the country.
African Americans didn't have the right to vote. Women didn't
have the right to vote. Right. And we, you know,
we've we've gone on I think non-partisan primaries are a progression. Right. Um,
we didn't even have primary elections until the, you know,
(20:26):
the great Progressive ERA when, you know, it was a
voter backlash of saying, hey, these party bosses are picking
the candidates and, you know, smoke filled rooms and the
voters don't actually have a choice. So we implemented primary
elections in order to bring voters into the process and
make it more transparent. Right. And now what we're saying is,
you know, these primary elections, there's been, um, they've erected walls.
(20:49):
They've made all kinds of barriers to participation on, on,
on competition in the primaries and stuff. And we have
such low voter turnout. We have closed primaries that we
need to reform that system. Right. That was a voter
enacted reform for the most part. Right. And now it's
time to reform it again. Um, so all these things,
I think, are just part of the development of our democracy, um,
(21:13):
and hopefully improvements.
S1 (21:16):
And you feel that that choice voting is, is one
of the reforms that we can implement into voting, um,
that will give the average American, the average citizen, the
average person who is registered to vote more of a
say in their government.
S2 (21:34):
I think a more meaningful vote and a more right,
a more representative system. Right. So, uh, it's not a
silver bullet, and all of a sudden we're going to
have a perfect government tomorrow and stuff. But I do
believe that it forces accountability across a broader segment of
(21:54):
the electorate, and that that more segments of the electorate
become important rather than just.
S1 (22:02):
Right.
S2 (22:02):
Basically, the two party bases that we have now.
S1 (22:06):
Right. Now, you mentioned New York, New York, um, where
they're having a an election for mayor and they're under
choice voting. Um, I think they have about five, seven candidates,
so they'll be able to rank those candidates.
S2 (22:22):
Right.
S1 (22:23):
Is there any place closer to New York that choice
voting is being used? Maybe some somewhere in California?
S2 (22:32):
Well, um, Oakland and San Francisco use ranked choice voting. Um,
the state of Maine uses it throughout the whole state. Um,
you know what's different in New York? That, you know,
I would have some you know, I actually wrote an
article talking about, you know.
S1 (22:50):
I want to get to that too.
S2 (22:51):
So New York right now is exploring open primaries, but
New York has closed primaries, and they're only implemented ranked
choice voting for the primaries. So if you're an independent
voter in New York, you don't even get to see
what ranked choice voting is like because you're not even
allowed to vote in the primaries in New York. Which
is why I take this out. This isn't a partisan.
(23:12):
It's really not a partisan. I think the ranked choice
voting has become very partisan in the electorate, because the
Republicans have seen it happen in places like Alaska, where
they didn't get the candidate they wanted elected under it.
And so they're like, oh, we're anti ranked choice voting.
The fact is, one of the most popular Republican governors,
Glenn Youngkin, he was elected in the Republican caucus. You
(23:34):
know how they you know how they selected him as
the nominee.
S1 (23:37):
Okay.
S2 (23:38):
Because the Republican caucus used ranked choice voting, and he
won on, like, the fifth round of the ballot, right?
They actually use it in some of their courses. So
they internally their party recognizes that there's good thing. And
don't get me wrong, just like anything else, you got
to implement it right. You got to do it right. Um,
(23:59):
you know, there's lots of nuances that can be in look,
in New York, they implemented it, but they implemented it
in a primary. Now, if the Democratic, uh, ranked choice
voting system produces a a majority, from the majority's view,
an unpopular candidate, what you're going to have is three, four,
(24:19):
five candidates in the general election running against each other
without ranked choice voting. So then what is New York
going to get?
S1 (24:29):
Well.
S2 (24:29):
They're going to get a mayor elected with 30 something
percent of the vote.
S1 (24:32):
Right. Exactly.
S2 (24:33):
Which is not a majority doesn't have doesn't have the
support of a majority of the city. Right. So But
from you can also say from election reform perspective that
in the arc of history, this experience is important because
it's educated the electorate. It's it's spurred this conversation we're
(24:53):
having today. Right.
S1 (24:55):
So yeah, so is it your belief then that um,
and belief feeling, um, that folks should be more supportive of,
of choice voting in primaries and general elections, or should
they just be looking at choice voting in a general election?
(25:17):
Is it across the board?
S2 (25:18):
I'm far from suggesting that I have the perfect solution, right?
And I think the only time's going to tell is
by use, you know, stuff. Um, what the. The more
choice coalition I've been a part of, I think has
put together a very good proposal which basically says right
now we have this nonpartisan primary, Everybody runs in the
(25:39):
top two candidates go to the general election. Okay. Right.
Our proposal says don't change anything about the primary. Just
advance five instead of two. Okay. We're not using ranked
choice voting yet. The primary. We're just. But let's advance five, right.
So if you can build up enough of a following
and make enough of a splash, or you should be
(26:00):
able to come into the top five, then in the
general election when twice as many people are voting, then
you use ranked choice voting. And there's five people to
choose from. Right. You have five you can five rankings
and five candidates to choose from. Right. Put them in
whatever order you want. And that's what has been proposed.
(26:22):
And if less than five people run, you eliminate the
primary altogether. Why do you need it? Save some taxpayer money. Right.
S1 (26:30):
And primaries or generals or either one.
S2 (26:34):
I'm saying if five or less run, you can just
eliminate the primary altogether, and you just run the general
election because you don't need it.
S1 (26:41):
And it sounds like if we eliminate the primary, that's
going to save a lot of money.
S2 (26:44):
That'll save. Yeah. Save a decent amount of money. Right.
So you also have a viewpoint which, you know, I
haven't embraced others do of just. Okay, then why don't
we just get rid of primaries, right.
S1 (26:56):
I was just thinking, there's.
S2 (26:57):
A lot there's a lot of people that advocate for that. Um,
my argument is, and I don't know. I don't know
that I'm right. I feel pretty confident I am that, um,
you know, when you have look at New York, when
you have, I think it's 12 candidates, right? Or you
have 12, 13, 18 candidates. Right. But you're the voters
can't you can't possibly wrap your head. I mean, I'm
(27:18):
pretty politically engaged and active. How do you how do
you credibly rank 18 people? How does how do you
make get 18 people to have enough space on the
newspaper page and, you know, on the press coverage, right.
Is that it's my belief you have to have some
winnowing factor. Right, and you want to make it as
fair as possible, does it have to be a primary?
(27:40):
Could it be signature? I don't have the answers to
that question. Right. But unless you limit the candidate field
to a discernible number like 4 or 5, where you
can't marginalize somebody, you can't. Some of the big power
brokers can't game the field and run four candidates that
are really, you know, all all really working for you.
(28:03):
You know what I mean? There's there's all kinds of
games that can be played. Is that the fairest way
to do it, I believe, is to limit the candidate
field to a number that people can wrap their head
around and that, you know, nobody can ignore and, and
have the same number of ranking spots as there are candidates.
S3 (28:23):
We're gonna put a pause in the conversation and we'll
be back right after this.
S4 (28:28):
Content creators ready to take your podcast from something you
just thinking about doing to making it a production reality.
Look no further than Ola's Media, San Diego's premier podcast network.
Located in the heart of Mission Valley.
S5 (28:41):
At Ola's media, we've got everything you need to produce
high quality podcasts with professional producers, state of the art facilities,
and talented graphic and sound designers will bring your vision
to life.
S4 (28:52):
Join our lineup of dynamic shows like Dear San Diego,
where we dive into the city's heartbeat beyond the doors
your go to for real estate and housing insights. Cannabis
enlightened exploring the evolving cannabis industry.
S5 (29:04):
Plus, attack of the Killer Tomatoes brings a fresh, fun
take on Newton's border. Masters shines a light on the
complexities of the US-Mexico border. No matter the topic, Ola's
is your creative home. Even our clients say so.
S4 (29:17):
Ready to bring your podcast to life? Let Ola's media
be your partner in production. Visit Ola's Media.com and get
started today.
S5 (29:26):
Let us amplify your brand.
S6 (29:32):
Alas media.
S3 (29:40):
And now here's more from our guests and our hosts.
S1 (29:42):
Would this be a move to have folks look at
candidates from the standpoint of their issues, or does it
go back to, um, name recognition or who I like,
or does that even matter?
S2 (29:51):
It's all it's all it's all of that. You know, frankly,
I think we totally underestimate how many people just vote
for the person they just like. They'll vote for people
they like. They don't agree with some, some a lot
of people. Right. Right now we have a very kind
of issue based voting camps, right? Everything's been put into
issues and stuff, and that you have the partisan bases
that are going to vote on those issues and stuff.
But I think we underestimate how many people want to
vote for somebody they like. Right. I'm electing you to
figure out all these issues and negotiate this and do that. Right. Um,
(30:12):
so I think it's a combination of all of that.
S1 (30:15):
Do you think as we move forward that, um, more
choice voting or choice voting is going to be meaningful
in the cannabis industry? Um, you know, it's federally legal.
Would there be a room or space for folks to, uh,
you know, implement or look at more choice voting in
terms of making cannabis legal across the board.
S2 (30:33):
I don't know if they'll be that direct of a connection,
but as I alluded to earlier, I think it would
create a better discussion about cannabis because, right, right now
you get a lot of, oh, are they pro or
are they against cannabis for cannabis or are they against cannabis? Right.
The whole point of more choice and having a, you know,
opening up the conversation, having different things is it allows
for nuance, right? Um, you can be pro cannabis, but
also want to regulate stuff within the space. You can
be against cannabis, but understand that there's value of having
(30:55):
it legalized and regulated. Right. So but those nuanced positions
don't have a place in today's political landscape. And so
I think the connection isn't quite as direct. Um, but
it's a natural consequence of having a system where you
have more voices and you have to appeal to more perspectives,
that you then have to have more nuanced positions.
S1 (31:09):
Gotcha, gotcha. You know, um, Chad, this has been very interesting.
I mean, you know, you're a very engaging, um, guest
with respect to almost anything, especially as we're talking politics and, um,
different ways to have your vote count. Um, is there
any way for folks to get in touch with you
and maybe, you know, want to ask you some further questions? Um, or,
you know, just pick your brain.
S2 (31:26):
I would visit independent voter Project.org. You can check out
our news website. We do a lot of coverage on
the cannabis issue at IBM. Or you can email me
at Chad at us directly.
S1 (31:34):
And what about you mentioned the article. I read your article.
I really like it. How would folks be able to
define that article?
S2 (31:40):
If you go to IBM or you just Google Chad
piece New York Primary and it should come up.
S1 (31:43):
All right. All right. Listen, thank you very much, Chad,
for being the guest on cannabis, enlightening and talking about
voting and kind of bringing it back home to cannabis issues.
We really appreciate your time that you spent with us.
S2 (31:53):
I appreciate you having me here. Anybody that wants to
sit through and talk about election reform, I'm happy.
S7 (31:56):
To do it.
S1 (31:57):
Well, thank you very much. Appreciate it. And I appreciate
all of you, cannabis listeners, for being with me on
another episode of Cannabis Enlightened. Remember this episode and all
the episodes of Cannabis Enlightened can be heard on the
Media Broadcasting Network. And if you'd like to reach out
to me with a comment just to say hi or,
you know, I really like that guest you had today,
Chad Pease, you can reach me at Doctor Leroy cannabis.
Cannabis enlightened. Com that's Doctor Leroy at Cannabis Enlightened. Com
(32:20):
thanks again for listening. And remember, as I always say,
knowledge is power.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com