That would be “liberal-leaning” Brookings;
Brookings had co-hosted one seminar on marijuana legalization before Boyd’s visit. Soon after the meeting, Brookings emerged as a hub of research that supported the views of the legalization movement — with prominent scholars offering at least 20 seminars, papers or op-ed pieces since early 2013 considering the idea. Before his death last year, Lewis donated $500,000 to Brookings, according to officials at the think tank. Two of the scholars working on the issue said they knew Lewis was their benefactor.
[…]
Over the past decade, a new business model has taken hold at Brookings. The Washington institution renowned for impeccable research and its clout as an independent policy architect has in recent years placed an emphasis on expansion and fundraising — giving scholars a bigger role in seeking money from donors and giving donors a voice in Brookings’s research agenda.
The shift has been powered by a new era of corporate influence in Washington, in which wealthy interests outside government are looking for new avenues to reach policymakers on the inside. Lobbyists are increasingly encouraging clients to donate to Brookings and other think tanks as a way of getting researchers to spend time on the issues that donors care about.
Cashing In and Selling Out are IN.
Morals and Ethics are OUT.
This is mentioned in the article way down, but I think it’s a big story in itself.
http://www.hudson.org/research/10621-how-peace-negotiator-martin-indyk-cashed-a-big-fat-14-8-million-check-from-qatar
Most institutions reflect the views of their benefactors anyway. Comes as no surprise in their quest for cash, that they sell out to keep the lights on. My question is why would a car insurance industry magnate push for legalization of marijuana.
They are all clear on that, after all it is not the bad oil companies.
Weed is the abortion of libertarians.
Looks like scholarship and academic integrity go under the bus for The Cause with these guys.
And they say Capitalists are all about money.
Actually, “Weed” is such low hanging fruit in their basket and one with such broad populist appeal across the political spectrum (outside of the minority social conservative constituency) that long before the first libertarian is, if ever, elected to higher office, (and remains libertarian) it will have been legalized/decriminalized by a statist government. The Spawn will likely do so if/when he becomes PM. Libertarians are by definition against drug prohibition whereas their opinions on abortion are all over the board. It’s the Spawn’s Liberal Party that holds abortion as sacrosanct but is attracted to the Weed issue purely for votes along with their penchant for cultural nihilism.