bicyclebenny
Active member
http://www.drugwarrant.com/2010/02/ending-federal-marijuana-prohibition/
Howard Wooldridge at Citizens Opposing Prohibition reports on a combined effort to lobby for a bill ending federal prohibition.
Here’s the FAQ prepared by Aaron Houston
Yes, it would be a nearly identical model of regulation (the “three-tiered” system), with few exceptions. The new federal marijuana law would allow — not require — any state or territory to change its current laws that strictly prohibit marijuana, which would include the possibility of a state creating a legal and regulated market for marijuana. As with alcohol regulation, federal law would still prohibit the “transportation or importation into any State … in violation of the laws thereof.” Of course, in the case of alcohol, the 21st Amendment lays out only the broadest concepts about the structure of the law. The Federal Alcohol Administration Act, subsequently passed by Congress, addresses details of the regulatory system, such as permitting, consumer protection, labeling, and policing of the industry.
Would a federal marijuana-regulation law force the states to make marijuana legal?
No, the federal law would not force states to change any existing laws or regulations, including those that outright prohibit marijuana possession and sales. Rather, the new federal law would simply free the states to decide as they so choose. Most Americans may not realize it today, but decades after the passage of the 21st Amendment (which repealed the 18th Amendment that codified alcohol prohibition) alcohol sales remained illegal in many areas of the nation. Mississippi did not lift its prohibition on alcohol sales until 1966, and in Kansas, on-premises sale of liquor remained illegal until 1987.
Which federal agencies would be affected by a new regulatory system?
The DEA and ATF would be the primary agencies impacted within the Department of Justice. The law would add new provisions to Title 27 of the U.S. Code, which would be changed from “Intoxicating liquors” to “Intoxicating substances” and be accompanied by conforming regulations similar to the Federal Alcohol Administration Act. Notably, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) would become the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Marijuana, Firearms and Explosives (ATMF). The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau within the U.S. Treasury Department would become the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Marijuana Tax and Trade Bureau, which would be responsible for administering the new law.
What differences would there be between alcohol and marijuana regulations?
While the repeal of alcohol prohibition required a constitutional amendment, repeal of marijuana prohibition merely requires an act of Congress. Alcohol transportation and sales were made legal by an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1933, at the start of FDR’s first term. In the following years, the power of the Congress to regulate interstate commerce in all manner of activities grew enormously, with the U.S. Supreme Court specifically affirming Congress’ authority to prohibit or not prohibit marijuana. One notable difference between federal alcohol laws and the proposed federal marijuana law is that the importation and exportation of marijuana would remain banned (which is not the case with alcohol).
- Prepared by: Aaron Houston of MPP (Marijuana Policy Project) - Distributed by: Howard Wooldridge of COPs (Citizens Opposing Prohibition)
Detective/Officer Howard Wooldridge (retired)
Drug Policy Specialist, COP – www.CitizensOpposingProhibition.org
Howard Wooldridge at Citizens Opposing Prohibition reports on a combined effort to lobby for a bill ending federal prohibition.
I received word this week that the major players on the Hill are now united in what direction to take regarding marijuana; namely push for a bill to repeal federal prohibition. COPs, MPP, DPA and NORML have all agreed on this strategy. MPP’s Aaron Houston produced an excellent one page sheet of FAQs. (provided below). We believe this bill will also help the ballot initiative in California to legalize adult use and sale.
It certainly seems obvious that something like this is going to have to happen eventually as a continuing (and partial) move toward full legalization/regulation. And now seems to be a very good time to start getting people used to it. It’ll be interesting to see the reactions of federal legislators on both sides of the aisle, control freaks all, as they adjust to the notion of letting states make actual decisions without them.
Here’s the FAQ prepared by Aaron Houston
— Regulating marijuana like alcohol —
Would a federal marijuana-regulation law be similar to the 21st Amendment that deals with alcohol?Yes, it would be a nearly identical model of regulation (the “three-tiered” system), with few exceptions. The new federal marijuana law would allow — not require — any state or territory to change its current laws that strictly prohibit marijuana, which would include the possibility of a state creating a legal and regulated market for marijuana. As with alcohol regulation, federal law would still prohibit the “transportation or importation into any State … in violation of the laws thereof.” Of course, in the case of alcohol, the 21st Amendment lays out only the broadest concepts about the structure of the law. The Federal Alcohol Administration Act, subsequently passed by Congress, addresses details of the regulatory system, such as permitting, consumer protection, labeling, and policing of the industry.
Would a federal marijuana-regulation law force the states to make marijuana legal?
No, the federal law would not force states to change any existing laws or regulations, including those that outright prohibit marijuana possession and sales. Rather, the new federal law would simply free the states to decide as they so choose. Most Americans may not realize it today, but decades after the passage of the 21st Amendment (which repealed the 18th Amendment that codified alcohol prohibition) alcohol sales remained illegal in many areas of the nation. Mississippi did not lift its prohibition on alcohol sales until 1966, and in Kansas, on-premises sale of liquor remained illegal until 1987.
Which federal agencies would be affected by a new regulatory system?
The DEA and ATF would be the primary agencies impacted within the Department of Justice. The law would add new provisions to Title 27 of the U.S. Code, which would be changed from “Intoxicating liquors” to “Intoxicating substances” and be accompanied by conforming regulations similar to the Federal Alcohol Administration Act. Notably, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) would become the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Marijuana, Firearms and Explosives (ATMF). The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau within the U.S. Treasury Department would become the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Marijuana Tax and Trade Bureau, which would be responsible for administering the new law.
What differences would there be between alcohol and marijuana regulations?
While the repeal of alcohol prohibition required a constitutional amendment, repeal of marijuana prohibition merely requires an act of Congress. Alcohol transportation and sales were made legal by an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1933, at the start of FDR’s first term. In the following years, the power of the Congress to regulate interstate commerce in all manner of activities grew enormously, with the U.S. Supreme Court specifically affirming Congress’ authority to prohibit or not prohibit marijuana. One notable difference between federal alcohol laws and the proposed federal marijuana law is that the importation and exportation of marijuana would remain banned (which is not the case with alcohol).
- Prepared by: Aaron Houston of MPP (Marijuana Policy Project) - Distributed by: Howard Wooldridge of COPs (Citizens Opposing Prohibition)
Detective/Officer Howard Wooldridge (retired)
Drug Policy Specialist, COP – www.CitizensOpposingProhibition.org
