What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Why Republicans are slowly embracing marijuana

RetroGrow

Active member
Veteran
Two articles in one day. The end is near for the prohibitionists. They are going to have to get real jobs now:

After years of voting down almost every proposal championed by pot legalization advocates, the House made a surprising move this week, approving a measure that would prohibit the Drug Enforcement Administration from busting state-licensed medical marijuana operations.
The action in the GOP-dominated House reflected a continued shift in thinking on the issue for lawmakers in that party. In the end, 49 Republicans supported the bill. It was more than a dozen more GOP votes in support than when the measure was first proposed in 2002. It was also co-sponsored by a Republican, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Huntington Beach).
“Some people are suffering, and if a doctor feels he needs to prescribe something to alleviate that suffering, it is immoral for this government to get in the way,” Rohrabacher said during the floor debate. “And that is what is happening.” The measure passed with just one vote to spare, 219-189.

Marijuana is a political conundrum for the GOP, traditionally the stridently anti-drug, law and order party. More than half the voters in the country now live in states where medical marijuana is legal, in many cases as a result of ballot measures. The most recent poll by the Pew Research Center found most Americans think pot should be legal, a major shift from just a decade ago when voters opposed legalization by a 2-to-1 margin.
Most GOP stalwarts, of course, continue to rail against liberalization of the laws. Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland, a physician, declared during floor debate that medical marijuana is a sham. Real medicine, he said, “is not two joints a day, not a brownie here, a biscuit there. That is not modern medicine.”
But in a sign of how the times are changing, he found himself challenged by a colleague from his own caucus who is also a doctor. Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.) spoke passionately in favor of the bill. “It has very valid medical uses under direction of a doctor,” he said. “It is actually less dangerous than some narcotics prescribed by doctors all over the country.” Georgia is among the many states experimenting with medical marijuana. A state program there allows its limited use to treat children with severe epileptic seizures.
The rise of the tea party, meanwhile, has given an unforeseen boost to the legalization movement. Some of its more prominent members see the marijuana component of the War on Drugs as an overreach by the federal government, and a violation of the rights of more than two dozen states that have legalized cannabis or specific components of it for medical use.
Pro-marijuana groups have lately taken to boosting the campaigns of such Republicans, even those running against Democrats. A notable case is in the Sacramento region, where the Marijuana Policy Project recently announced it was endorsing Igor Birman, a tea partier seeking to knock out Democrat Ami Berra in a swing congressional district.

“Igor is among the growing number of Republicans with common sense views on marijuana, said a statement this week from Dan Riffle, a lobbyist with the Marijuana Policy Project.

The measure approved by the House on Friday prohibits the Justice Department and DEA of using their funds to interfere with the implementation of state medical marijuana laws. It is now headed to the Senate.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-gop-marijuana-20140530-story.html
 

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
between the govt over-reach, the Tea partiers hatred of federal power, & the GOP needing more voters besides the old white fuckers that dominate the party, there is the smell of money in the air! maybe this will give O the spine he needed to demand that the DEA drop weed from sch. 1 to 3 or 4. but boy, what are we gonna do with a buttload of unemployed narcs? yes, I know. the zoo in Europe still needs meat for its lions so they don't gotta kill another giraffe... :biggrin:
 

igrowone

Well-known member
Veteran
it's progress, the ball keeps moving
this would put the law in synch with BO's 'directives' to DOJ to not pursue state legal operations
don't know how much further it will progress at the moment, but still great to see it
 

Jhhnn

Active member
Veteran
I'm not too crazy about the MPP endorsing a Tea Party crackpot.

Nor am I, but politics make for strange bedfellows, particularly when it comes to single issue organization endorsements. There's an undeniable libertarian streak in the Tea Party, a la Ron Paul, along with a lot of other stuff.
 

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
Let's see how it does in the Senate.

Filibuster, anyone?

the DEMs rule the Senate, & changed the filibuster rules so that it only takes a simple majority (51 votes) to break a filibuster. they've GOT that, do they have the cajones' to do the right thing ahead of the 2014 mid-terms? I think they do. yes, it is a hot-button issue, but one the public is pushing for...
 

Jhhnn

Active member
Veteran
the DEMs rule the Senate, & changed the filibuster rules so that it only takes a simple majority (51 votes) to break a filibuster. they've GOT that, do they have the cajones' to do the right thing ahead of the 2014 mid-terms? I think they do. yes, it is a hot-button issue, but one the public is pushing for...

Incorrect. Filibuster rule changes only apply to confirmation of some Presidential nominees.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...65cfe8-52b6-11e3-9fe0-fd2ca728e67c_story.html
 

oldchuck

Active member
Veteran
Also, this is a small amendment to a much larger appropriations bill. Appropriations is a chaotic process these days so there is no telling what will end up on Obama's desk. DEA lobbyists will jump in with both feet and they are highly skilled at getting their own way with congress.

The House amendment, however, has had it's best effect by attracting enough Republicans to pass it and be hailed as a bipartisan effort. Somebody should take a look, though, at those 20 odd Democrats who voted against it. And I still would never vote for a Tea Party asshole or a Republican no matter what their stand on weed was.
 

Jhhnn

Active member
Veteran
Also, this is a small amendment to a much larger appropriations bill. Appropriations is a chaotic process these days so there is no telling what will end up on Obama's desk. DEA lobbyists will jump in with both feet and they are highly skilled at getting their own way with congress.

The House amendment, however, has had it's best effect by attracting enough Republicans to pass it and be hailed as a bipartisan effort. Somebody should take a look, though, at those 20 odd Democrats who voted against it. And I still would never vote for a Tea Party asshole or a Republican no matter what their stand on weed was.

I can't argue.
 
Actually more likely the republicans are doing this because they know dems were going to use this as a wedge issue in 2014 and 2016 as a single issue voter turnout at the polls. They know more voters will turn out just to legilize mmj and rec in states when the issue shows up on the ballet in every state or most anyway. When that happens more democrates get votes.

Also could involve companies pressing for legilization so the pharm companies and monsanto can market their products. i.e. gmo weed, pills and sativex. We all know that is going to happen eventually.
 
What should be (or will be) happening is a rash of pharma to try to "patent" it, then lobbyist get the laws passed and then the 'pubs have something to latch on to (more profit). When that ball starts rollin, it's all over.

I'm still speculating if the future in USA will allow "home grown" or guess what? DEA agents still have a job!

I can brew up some mean alcohol at home, but it's not illegal, only if I sell it does the local Beverage and Alcohol agents get a fuzz up their ass. Same should be for home grown. Pharma can and will (see money) take it over. Matter of time.

I do see the GOP flopping in next election cycle, if they don't hurry up and get behind it.

Next up, IF a Republican Pres takes office w a repub congress, will they reverse all the cannibus laws? I might be watching too much CNN and FOX. LOL
 

Jhhnn

Active member
Veteran
What should be (or will be) happening is a rash of pharma to try to "patent" it, then lobbyist get the laws passed and then the 'pubs have something to latch on to (more profit). When that ball starts rollin, it's all over.

I'm still speculating if the future in USA will allow "home grown" or guess what? DEA agents still have a job!

I can brew up some mean alcohol at home, but it's not illegal, only if I sell it does the local Beverage and Alcohol agents get a fuzz up their ass. Same should be for home grown. Pharma can and will (see money) take it over. Matter of time.

I do see the GOP flopping in next election cycle, if they don't hurry up and get behind it.

Next up, IF a Republican Pres takes office w a repub congress, will they reverse all the cannibus laws? I might be watching too much CNN and FOX. LOL

Big Pharma can't change the Colorado State Constitution. No matter what the Feds do, they won't get any help from State authorities when it comes to personal growers.

The Obama Admin figured that out rather quickly, just walked away from enforcement at that level. I don't think it'll ever be able to come back, certainly not after a few more years of smooth sailing legalization.
 

MrGoodBudz

Member
Veteran
I'm independent myself but have strong republican family on my more religious side of the family. I have always thought a true republican has to believe in capitalism regardless of industry. They don't want discriminatory regulations for their businesses either.
 

WelderDan

Well-known member
Veteran
It's progress. I'll take it. Considering the previous zero tolerance attitude, this is big. Very big. I don't care who or what party made the amendment. It's the right thing to do, period.

Ending prohibition is like eating and elephant. It's done one bite at a time.
 

Jhhnn

Active member
Veteran
It's progress. I'll take it. Considering the previous zero tolerance attitude, this is big. Very big. I don't care who or what party made the amendment. It's the right thing to do, period.

Ending prohibition is like eating and elephant. It's done one bite at a time.

True, although there are barriers that can't be crossed with baby steps, full legalization with personal growing being one of them.

Finding total prohibition to be an indefensible position, authoritarians will attempt to pull back to a MMJ only position, leaving the vast majority of users & personal growers on the wrong side of the law. In that, they'll try to split the coalition building so essential to the passage of A64 here in CO. They'll also try to put it in terms of legislated privilege rather than Constitutional Right, maintaining a trick bag of plant counts vs home possession limits if not maintaining prohibition of personal growing entirely. They'll try to move backwards using semi-plausible excuses, as we're seeing in WA.

They'll try to make it so that "better" still sucks.
 

jump /injack

Member
Veteran
" Somebody should take a look, though, at those 20 odd Democrats who voted against it. And I still would never vote for a Tea Party asshole or a Republican no matter what their stand on weed was." If you won't vote against those that voted against cannabis why even look to see who your enemies of this subject are? Senator Feinstein/Boxer and most of those Democrats in Sacramento voted against legalizing MJ, it was only because of the referendum vote by the People of the State that got Medical Marijuana passed as law. Even now Governor Jerry Brown is calling those who smoke weed "potheads" and worthless as citizens. The SEIU and Guards Unions are the biggest boosters of sending you to prison in order to protect their jobs and they own the Democrats, they are the largest contributors to the Democrat Party. Call your representatives and tell them you'll vote for anyone except them if they continue voting against legalization; that they'll understand.
 

Jhhnn

Active member
Veteran
" Somebody should take a look, though, at those 20 odd Democrats who voted against it. And I still would never vote for a Tea Party asshole or a Republican no matter what their stand on weed was." If you won't vote against those that voted against cannabis why even look to see who your enemies of this subject are? Senator Feinstein/Boxer and most of those Democrats in Sacramento voted against legalizing MJ, it was only because of the referendum vote by the People of the State that got Medical Marijuana passed as law. Even now Governor Jerry Brown is calling those who smoke weed "potheads" and worthless as citizens. The SEIU and Guards Unions are the biggest boosters of sending you to prison in order to protect their jobs and they own the Democrats, they are the largest contributors to the Democrat Party. Call your representatives and tell them you'll vote for anyone except them if they continue voting against legalization; that they'll understand.

Here's the list-

http://www.thedailychronic.net/2014...-representatives-voted-for-medical-marijuana/

Despite claims to the contrary, it was largely a party line vote.

It's important to consider what else politicians bring with them to such an issue, because it's not the only issue, not by a long shot.

Republican economic policy, in general, serves the financial elite & the negative effect that explosive inequality has on our society. Vote for 'em only if you're eager to be a bug on the windshield of financialized international corporatism. What's good for holders of great wealth isn't necessarily good for the rest of us at all. They thrive on contrived economic instability. The rest of us can't.
 
I have to disagree with most of the comments in this thread, I think you guys are missing the issue at hand.


State rights vs Federal power. If you understand politics, you know where the republicans side on this one.


The Republicans don't care about pot.


This is a state right's issue and especially with the recent press involving the BLM, they know they have to tow the party line on this one.

They could give a shit about pot. When republicans get turned on this issue, worry. They are going to set regulations to ass rape the individual rights to grow on their own and they will centralize the market, cornering it essentially, and handing over the reins to their own people who they will cherry pick to run our market.
 
Top