Most Americans Want Feds To Respect State Pot Laws, But Whether They Will Is Up For Debate

Most Americans Want Feds To Respect State Pot Laws, But Whether They Will Is Up For Debate

http://www.alternet.org/most-americ...FjH&rd=1&src=newsletter760426&t=15&paging=off

Although the voice of the feds is but a mere whisper at this point, others are speaking loud and clear.

December 12, 2012



Recently, the citizens of Colorado and Washington made a decision about how their respective states should regulate marijuana. Since then, the state and local governments have responded by ceasing arrests for those in compliance with the new laws, dismissing pending cases for marijuana offenses, providing new information to the public, and most importantly, certifying the results of the election so that the laws take effect.

Each state's laws are different, but they have one very important thing in common: Both call for the state to be involved in the taxation, regulation and distribution of marijuana for adults 21 and over. Now, the million-dollar question is, how will the federal government respond? Despite a brief phone call between Governor Hickenlooper from Colorado and Eric Holder, and mumblings about a potential lawsuit, the White House et al. have been relatively quiet about whether they will respect the will of the citizens of these states.

Although the voice of the feds is but a mere whisper at this point, others are speaking loud and clear. A recent Gallup poll shows that 64% of those surveyed feel the federal government should not enforce federal marijuana laws in states that pass legalization measures. While this group contains the usual supporters such as those who support marijuana legalization (87% think the feds should stay away), of note is that 43% of those who do not support marijuana legalization also do not support federal interference in state marijuana laws.

This suggests that this is not about marijuana entirely, but also about respecting the will of the citizens of those states. The United States is a mix of cultures, beliefs, priorities and lifestyles. The ability of states to regulate and oversee issues related to the health and welfare of their citizens is paramount in designing and developing programs that are tailor made to the communities they serve. When these programs are overseen by the federal government, the result is a poorly designed, non-specific, ineffective program such as DARE, which was the only drug education program funded by the federal government.

Also speaking out loudly against federal interference are the leaders of Colorado, who introduced H.R. 6606 – Respect States’ and Citizens’ Rights Act. This bi-partisan act, introduced by Reps. Diana DeGette (D) and Mike Coffman (R) asks the feds to respect the will of the voters in Colorado and Washington on this issue.

Reps. DeGette and Coffman are not alone. Additional legislation has been introduced in the past few years aimed at preventing federal interference in state level marijuana laws. H.R. 2306 – Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011 introduced by Reps. Barney Frank (D-CA) and Ron Paul (R-TX), would remove marijuana from the federal government’s list of controlled substances, leaving individual states free to either prohibit or tax and regulate it according to their own policies. H.R. 6335 – the States’ Medical Marijuana Property Rights Protection Act was introduced by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) to prevent the Department of Justice from initiating civil asset forfeiture proceedings against property owners of state-sanctioned medical marijuana treatment centers based solely on marijuana-related activity.

Furthermore, the City of Oakland recently sued the federal government to prevent the closure of its largest medical marijuana dispensary, Harborside Health Center, on the grounds that it would negatively impact the local community both in terms of tax revenue and access to care.
The citizens of Washington and Colorado, the greater society of the United States, including those who are against marijuana legalization, elected officials and even entire cities are speaking loud and clear about the rights of states to make their own decisions about marijuana regulation. Leaving these decisions up to the states and their citizens allows for regulations that better reflect the needs and desires of communities and those who inhabit them.

Groucho Marx popularized the saying, “Will it play in Peoria?” in the 1920s and '30s. It means that if the city of Peoria, Illinois likes it, then everyone in America will because the citizens in Peoria are typical, average Americans. In 2012, there is no “average” American citizen, and laws should reflect the diversity and homogeneity of our society. The answer comes through loud and clear: respect the voice of the citizens concerning the regulation of marijuana.

While we have many 'bi-partisan' bills, most of them originated in the house.

Just recently we picked one up from the senate. This is big.

http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2012/12/senate_judiciary_chairman_wants_to_resolve_federal.php#more

In a letter to U.S. Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) asked how the federal government intends to deal with states like Colorado and Washington that recently voted to regulate and tax marijuana like alcohol. In the letter, Senator Leahy also suggested that federal legislation could be introduced to legalize up to an ounce of marijuana, at least in states that have legalized marijuana.
The letter, sent last week but reported on Thursday in the Huffington Post, notes that "[o]ne option would be to amend the Federal Controlled Substances Act to allow possession of up to one ounce of marijuana, at least in jurisdictions where it is legal under state law."
There are several bipartisan bills in the U.S. House that would reform federal marijuana laws, but so far none in the Senate. A few weeks ago Republican Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) said he is considering introducing legislation to reform federal marijuana laws.

​

"It is striking, first and foremost, because members of the U.S. Senate have been remarkably quiet on issues of marijuana policy in recent years," Nadelmann said. "The 36 Senators representing the 18 states where marijuana has been legalized for medical purposes have taken little initiative to defend patients and others involved in medical marijuana from federal attacks.
"Senator Leahy's intervention, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is thus all the more welcome insofar as it suggests that Senate leadership is now willing to address the issue with public hearings and letters to the White House," Nadelmann said.
"The Senator's suggestion that the Federal Controlled Substances Act be amended to allow possession of up to one ounce of marijuana, at least in jurisdictions where it is now legal under state law, represents a modest but significant proposal - modest because federal (as opposed to local) law enforcement authorities rarely arrest and prosecute Americans for possessing such small amounts, but significant in that it proposes new federal legislation to accommodate legalization innovations by the states," Nadelmann said.
"The most important part of the Senator's letter is when he states that 'legislative options exist to resolve the differences between federal and state law in this area and end the uncertainty that residents of Colorado and Washington now face' and asks about assurances from the administration that state officials will not be prosecuted for implementing the new laws," Nadelmann said. "The ballot initiatives in Washington and Colorado made history not so much because they legalized possession of small amounts of marijuana but because they mandated that the state governments regulate and tax what had previously been illicit markets.
"Ending marijuana prohibition not just in the states but also nationally is going to require the sort of leadership that Senator Leahy has just demonstrated," Nadelmann said. "Now is the time for his colleagues to stand up as well in defense of responsible state regulation of marijuana for both medical and recreational consumers."

Click to expand...