Get the Feds Out Of The Marijuana Enforcement Business

http://norml.org/news/2015/02/26/us...eds-out-of-the-marijuana-enforcement-business


US Congress: Legislation Introduced To Get the Feds Out Of The Marijuana Enforcement Business
Thursday, 26 February 2015

HR 1013, the Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol Act, removes cannabis from the United States Controlled Substances Act
US Congress: Legislation Introduced To Get the Feds Out Of The Marijuana Enforcement Business
Washington, DC: Legislation was introduced Friday in the US House of Representatives to permit states to establish their own marijuana regulatory policies free from federal interference.
House Resolution 1013: the Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol Act, removes cannabis from the United States Controlled Substances Act. It also removes enforcement power from the US Drug Enforcement Administration in matters concerning marijuana possession, production, and sales - thus permitting state governments to regulate these activities as they see fit.
Said the bill's primary sponsor, Democrat Jared Polis of Colorado: "Over the past year, Colorado has demonstrated that regulating marijuana like alcohol takes money away from criminals and cartels, grows our economy, and keeps marijuana out of the hands of children. While President Obama and the Justice Department have allowed the will of voters in states like Colorado and 22 other jurisdictions to move forward, small business owners, medical marijuana patients, and others who follow state laws still live with the fear that a new administration - or this one - could reverse course and turn them into criminals. It is time for us to replace the failed prohibition with a regulatory system that works and let states and municipalities decide for themselves if they want, or don't want, to have legal marijuana within their borders."
Separate legislation, House Resolution 1014: the Marijuana Tax Revenue Act, introduced by Democrat Rep. Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, seeks to impose a federal excise tax on the retail sale of marijuana for non-medical purposes as well as apply an occupational tax for state-licensed marijuana businesses. Such commercial taxes would only be applicable if and when Congress has moved to defederalize marijuana prohibition.
"Together these bills create a federal framework to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana, much like we treat alcohol and tobacco," said Rep. Blumenauer. "As more states move to legalize marijuana, ... it's imperative the federal government become a full partner in building a workable and safe framework."

This is a symbolic thing they do about every two years in Congress. Don't expect it to go anywhere.

*^^ maybe we'll get lucky this time.

Nah. That would require, at the very least, the US House of Representatives actually representing the will of those they're theoretically supposed to represent. After that, it'd take a Senate willing to override the inevitable veto by two-thirds. Even then, after all that, we'd have to withdraw from the Single Convention (which we basically wrote and bullied the rest of the world into accepting).

Don't get me wrong, all that shit will happen eventually- I firmly believe that reason always wins in the end. Just don't expect it to be quite so soon.

These bills are basically efforts by the few good people in Congress to start the long, slow erosion of cannabis prohibition on the federal level by reminding people that this is inevitable. Unfortunately, as erosion, the inevitable can sometimes take a while.

Preacher said:

Nah. That would require, at the very least, the US House of Representatives actually representing the will of those they're theoretically supposed to represent. After that, it'd take a Senate willing to override the inevitable veto by two-thirds. Even then, after all that, we'd have to withdraw from the Single Convention (which we basically wrote and bullied the rest of the world into accepting).

Click to expand...

what makes you so sure that it would be vetoed? and the Single Convention on Narcotics could be amended to delete cannabis from the list of drugs it covers...a win-win all the way around, and the pols would have political cover from the outraged asshats that still think prohibition is a good idea.

armedoldhippy said:

what makes you so sure that it would be vetoed? and the Single Convention on Narcotics could be amended to delete cannabis from the list of drugs it covers...a win-win all the way around, and the pols would have political cover from the outraged asshats that still think prohibition is a good idea.

Click to expand...

About the veto: the kindest thing Obama has said about cannabis prohibition is that federal funding/enforcement should be redistributed toward rehab rather than jail, and his actual budget proposals do not back this up. In the insane chance that this somehow passes through a Republican-controlled House and the Senate, Obama will veto legalization for political survival at the very least, as well as the fact that as a Constitutional scholar he's aware that he lacks the power to supersede the Single Convention.

To elaborate, the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs is an international treaty, and the Constitution says that international treaties carry the same legal weight as amendments to the Constitution. Only the repeal of prohibition of alcohol has ever been reversed on that kind of level, and considering the federal government has only doubled-down on the prohibition of cannabis, it'll take a great bit of time and effort before the herb is legal on a federal level. While inevitable, we must be patient.

Obama cannot run again, he needs no protection. he might use the veto trying to protect Hillary's chance at the office, but there is nothing that the GOP can do to him if he does not veto it. hell, they ALREADY want to impeach him, but cannot find actual legal grounds to do so. you think signing a bill that made it through congress is going to get him in trouble?

armedoldhippy said:

he might use the veto trying to protect Hillary's chance at the office, but there is nothing that the GOP can do to him if he does not veto it.

Click to expand...

Bingo. What I meant to say, and what I should've said, is that Obama is conscious to the future political power of the Democratic party.

Preacher said:

Bingo. What I meant to say, and what I should've said, is that Obama is conscious to the future political power of the Democratic party.

Click to expand...

you cannot really blame him. I can't stand anyone running (rand paul excluded) but if a right-wing GOP president gets in there with a majority in each house it could get VERY ugly for a few years...

armedoldhippy said:

you cannot really blame him. I can't stand anyone running (rand paul excluded) but if a right-wing GOP president gets in there with a majority in each house it could get VERY ugly for a few years...

Click to expand...

that is the question, at least implicitly
can anything be done at the federal level realiisticly
guns drawn and charge into the legal rec states January 21st, 2016 if the vote goes their way?
i don't see that, it really looks like it's slipping out of federal control
DEA headquarters must have some interesting conversations lately

igrowone said:

DEA headquarters must have some interesting conversations lately

Click to expand...

yup. it goes something like this - "FUCK! NOW what do we do for a living? i don't want to bust tweakers, those cocksuckers are DANGEROUS!!! " i just feel so badly for them...NOT!

^^^ i feel that way from time to time, feel better hating on them
but i think most of them don't really care, might even end up a + for them
if nothing else, state growing operations will be monitored by them
eventually both sides lay down their guns, peace is made in such ways