Congress Effectively Ends The Federal Ban On Medical Marijuana

[GrassMonkey]

It seems the controversial $1.1T spending bill that is preventing the U.S. government from shutting down is chock full of surprises. As you may know, much to the dismay of marijuana activists and lovers of democracy everywhere, the bill smacked down Washington DCs referendum that legalized recreational marijuana in the nation's capital. What you may have missed (because those shifty politicians are doing everything under the table) is that the bill also quietly, but effectively lifted the federal ban on medical marijuana.

 

In the depths of the 1,603-page document is a provision that prohibits federal agents from raiding retail medical cannabis operations in states that have legalized medical cannabis. The passage represents "the first time in decades that the federal government has curtailed its oppressive prohibition of marijuana," the measure's co-author, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, told the LA Times.

Though President Obama has generally favored this approach policy-wise, the passage of the bill also ensures that the next president can't backtrack and begin busting medical cannabis operations.

The full text of the measure reads as such:

 

"Sec. 538. None of the funds made available in this Act to the Department of Justice may be used, with respect to the States of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, to prevent such States from implementing their own State laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana. Sec. 539. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used in contravention of section 7606 (``Legitimacy of Industrial Hemp Research'') of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-79) by the Department of Justice or the Drug Enforcement Administration."

 

Important to note is that this legislation is fully in light of the fact that marijuana is considered a Schedule I drug with "no medical uses" by federal standards. Seeing as how logically this does not work, this folks, must represent the beginning of the end for marijuana prohibition -- especially from the point of view of Congress.

 

Now that there will be little threat of backlash from the federal government, it's time to lobby your state for the legalization of medical marijuana if you live in one of the 18 states where it is outrageously outlawed. No excuses. Onwards and upwards to completely legal, recreational and medical marijuana for all!

 

http://www.hightimes.com/read/congress-effectively-ends-federal-ban-medical-marijuana

[bobandtorey]

WASHINGTON (AP) - It's easy for Congress to meddle with the District of Columbia's decision to legalize recreational use of marijuana, but taking on the states is a different matter.

A catch-all spending bill Congress passed last week would prevent the District from using federal and local money to implement any law or regulation that repeals or reduces marijuana-related penalties. The action is in direct response to a voter initiative passed last month that allows possession of up to 2 ounces of pot or up to three mature plants for personal use.

The Constitution gives Congress the power to review and possibly reject all legislation approved by the District's elected officials or its citizens.

Congress has less leverage with the states, and thwarting efforts supported by a plurality of voters back home could prove risky at election time.

"That's sort of asking for a head-on collision with states' rights," said Philip Wallach of the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based think tank.

Wallach said the most ready tool at Congress' disposal in persuading states to keep marijuana illegal would be to withhold money for certain programs if state marijuana initiatives conflict with federal law. That's something Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., chairman of a House panel on the Constitution and civil justice, says he's prepared to support.

Franks said the marijuana legalization movement endangers youth. Many other Republican lawmakers don't seem ready to take such concrete steps, including Sens. Charles Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, the likely chairmen of committees that could deal with marijuana laws in the next Congress.

Grassley wasn't prepared to say what issues the Judiciary Committee will focus on; Johnson said he'd like a hearing by the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on how marijuana legalization is working but that's as far as he would commit.

The Justice Department has said it will not stand in the way of states that want to legalize, tax and regulate marijuana as long as there are effective controls to keep it away from kids, the black market and federal property.

Proponents of marijuana legalization know exactly where they want to go next. Their itinerary includes pushes into California, Arizona, Nevada, Maine and Massachusetts. There's money to be raised for campaign ads, ballot initiatives to write and petition campaigns to organize. Four states have voted to legalize marijuana: Washington and Colorado first, followed by Oregon and Alaska.

"Republican Senate or not, we're going to keep moving forward," said Bill Piper of the Drug Policy Alliance, which advocates an overhaul of drug policy.

The group points to another section of the just-passed spending bill as evidence that most lawmakers don't want Congress to interfere with state decisions regarding marijuana. That provision would prevent the Justice Department from using money to prosecute medical marijuana patients or distributors who are in compliance with their state's laws.

Twenty-three states have legalized medical marijuana, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The GOP's most consistent backer of the legalization movement, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California, said he's simply unsure where a Republican-controlled Congress will take the marijuana issue.

"I can't read my fellow Republicans on this," he said. "Behind the scenes, they will tell you, 'Oh, yeah, (prohibition) is stupid, but I'm not going to risk my political career.'"

Republican Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland, an anesthesiologist who has led the congressional effort to halt the District of Columbia's marijuana initiative through September 2015, said prohibiting recreational marijuana use is the right thing to do, whatever the politics.

"If we can educate the public about the hazards, especially given the high unemployment rate among D.C. youth, the problems they have in the educational systems, I think we can convince people the last thing they need in the District of Columbia is legalization," he said.

The effort to legalize marijuana in the District was spurred by concerns about racial disparities in marijuana arrests, with black people making up about 90 percent of marijuana arrests, yet only about half of the city's residents.

Asked whether Republican leaders were ready to take on the legalization trend elsewhere, Harris said he would agree the issue is not a priority for them.

"The plate of leadership is so full with foreign affairs and economic matters in this country, this is just not on their radar screen," he said.

Said Wallach from Brookings: "It probably makes political sense for a lot of people to just lay low on this issue."

[Norby]

Yep, too focused on other countries citizens and their wealthy friends to help the Americans they swore to represent.  Fukers.

[Indigro]

"If we can educate the public about the hazards, especially given the high unemployment rate among D.C. youth, the problems they have in the educational systems, I think we can convince people the last thing they need in the District of Columbia is legalization," he said.

 

Such moo poo... crime decreases or stays the same, same w underage use of mj, at least in other mmj states that have measured... despite all the doom & gloom rhetoric. Unemployment has dick little to do w these laws, except for the cops & lawyers, and even they admit to other priorities being of greater value... except for their asset siezures of course. Most city cops where mmj disp get along just fine w disp & patients & cg's once they go through their attitude adjustment...they tend to even be model citizens & business members of whichever community.

 

Want to make an impact on the status of the disenfranchised & destitute... take all the money from mmj licensing & taxation, and apply it to primary education, preventative medical care & free, nutritious food programs for kids & moms.

[YesMichigan]

"Sec. 538. None of the funds made available in this Act to the Department of Justice may be used, with respect to the States of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, to prevent such States from implementing their own State laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana. Sec. 539. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used in contravention of section 7606 (``Legitimacy of Industrial Hemp Research'') of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-79) by the Department of Justice or the Drug Enforcement Administration."

 

I have followed this closely and looked on with mild enthusiasm because it reads like a verbal maze constructed by wormy people.

 

"None of the funds made available in this Act..." - Department surpluses or alternative funding sources are around that can be found to continue the persecution...errr prosecution...

 

"from implementing their own state laws..." So the Federal government won't stop a state from having its own laws regarding medical marijuana - that changes nothing. What about once they are implemented? Is it game on? I would feel better if they said "Implement and maintain..." contract lawyers wrote it the way they did on purpose.

 

"distribution" - distribution does not require sale. You know they chose that word VERY carefully. Nowhere do they specifically designate that a state or other sanctioned agency can sell marijuana without threat of prosecution from the DoJ or DEA utilizing this budget's coffers. This would seem to be the likely point of debate in next year's annual dispensary purge somewhere in America.

 

The only path to the freedom our forefathers and mothers wanted for us is for Congress to end its illegal and immoral classification of Marijuana as a Schedule I narcotic. Until that day, every carrot has a barbed hook in it set by dark-ages feudal tyrants hell bent on confiscating and/or imprisoning all they survey.

Edited December 19, 2014 by YesMichigan

[t-pain]

I have followed this closely and looked on with mild enthusiasm because it reads like a verbal maze constructed by wormy people.

you are one of the few to understand that this bill/law does little to help anyone.

 

you dont think that "implementing their own State laws" = not interfering with state laws on marijuana?

 

it is sad that all media reports on this issue say otherwise. maybe we could start contacting the senators responsible for the languange and get them to clarify it?

[Willy]

you are one of the few to understand that this bill/law does little to help anyone.

 

you dont think that "implementing their own State laws" = not interfering with state laws on marijuana?

 

it is sad that all media reports on this issue say otherwise. maybe we could start contacting the senators responsible for the languange and get them to clarify it?

 Yes they should, its got lots of holes and is kinda grey area's are confusing to me...

[YesMichigan]

you are one of the few to understand that this bill/law does little to help anyone.

 

you dont think that "implementing their own State laws" = not interfering with state laws on marijuana?

 

it is sad that all media reports on this issue say otherwise. maybe we could start contacting the senators responsible for the languange and get them to clarify it?

 

I missed your question initially, my apologies. It is only "medicinal marijuana" they wrote it so the Feds can still mess with Washington and Colorado. Do I think they are sleazy enough to use the word implement and then say "Well we didn't say maintain..."? Yes, totally. They are vinegar and water solutions packaged in a plastic bag with a convenient applicator tip.

 

The President has stated he doesn't want the DoJ messing with medical marijuana but has not come close to being the advocate to end the persecution many had hoped for. I'm in the minority that I don't blame Obama for that one, the anti-drug money funds and runs this country. Today's system works for the aristocrat - to them they see the "bottom-feeders" in need of change and well - whatever.

 

Imagine spending your life trying to figure out how to imprison other people and take their stuff? The darkness that represents their souls. You and I have NOTHING in common with those people yet we try to understand them. They are not humans - they are parasites without conscience or compassion.

[VisitingFromCali]

I did not realize the bill lifted the federal ban---at least that's some progress. Would be nice if as Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (actually my rep in California) observed--most Republicans privately believe prohibition is stupid, but they don't want to risk their careers--would do what's right and have some courage!

[t-pain]

the federal bill does not lift any bans.

[t-pain]

i think there is an interesting dynamic going on here.

newspapers are running with the idea that marijuana is being legalized or unbanned, even when its not. for example in washington its illegal to grow a plant and in colorado having 5 plants is illegal etc. also some newspapers said marijuana was legal in those 16 cities in michigan, but in reality its not and police can still arrest you under state law.

but i think all of these positive 'marijuana is legalized' stories may be changing public opinion. so they see that washington legalized marijuana, even though its not legalized, and they say oh, we could do that too. so then public opinion changes from 50/50 to 60/40 approval.

which is good i guess. in a way. even if people are getting fooled and putting themselves against the law. its for the greater good ?

well not with me. so i'll be telling everyone i can, in every way i can that they need to read the law and not believe whatever some newspaper article tells them.

are newspapers in on the game? are they misleading people in order so that police can arrest more people and private prisons can put more people in jail and courts and mandatory drug treatment and tests can all get a piece of the action?

[YesMichigan]

Misdirection and subterfuge via the media? I think ambiguity is a continuing intent. I like your lists because you don't forget the ancillary industries that benefit from prohibition.

 

"people are getting fooled and putting themselves against the law." - I like this comment - it is provincial for me to think that most people are going to research alternative news sources and read briefings regarding CoA rulings to understand what the law reads in a given locale. That is the part that makes me cry, the lights in the rear view or the cops at the door. To have a person's life taken from them, their future job prospects limited and a myriad other civil right's abuses because...I honestly do not know why. They don't know why. They inherited this system and it says they get to take stuff from certain people and by golly stuff is awesome!

 

How do we educate people on how far we have NOT come? I'm all in.

[cristinew]

, to prevent such States    that is the key,  they have all the funds still to arrest the people patients caregivers , they just cannot arrest the state,