PDA

View Full Version : States Rights? Never heard of em


S Carver Orne
10-16-2010, 04:31 PM
U.S. Will Enforce Marijuana Laws, State Vote Aside

The Department of Justice says it intends to prosecute marijuana laws in California aggressively even if state voters approve an initiative on the Nov. 2 ballot to legalize the drug.

The announcement by Eric H. Holder Jr., the attorney general, was the latest reminder of how much of the establishment has lined up against the popular initiative: dozens of editorial boards, candidates for office, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and other public officials.

Still, despite this opposition — or perhaps, to some extent, because of it — the measure, Proposition 19, appears to have at least a decent chance of winning, so far drawing considerable support in polls from a coalition of Democrats, independents, younger voters and men as Election Day nears. Should that happen, it could cement a cultural shift in California, where medical marijuana has been legal since 1996 and where the drug has been celebrated in popular culture at least since the 1960s.

But it could also plunge the nation’s most populous state into a murky and unsettling conflict with the federal government that opponents of the proposition said should make California voters wary of supporting it.

Washington has generally looked the other way as a growing medical marijuana industry has prospered here and in 14 other states and the District of Columbia, but Mr. Holder’s position — revealed in a letter this week to nine former chiefs of the Drug Enforcement Administration that was made public on Friday — made explicit that legalizing marijuana for recreational use would bring a whole new level of scrutiny from Washington.

Mr. Holder did not fully spell out the reasons for the decision, but he did allude to the reluctance of the federal government to enforce drug laws differently in different states. “If passed, this legislation will greatly complicate federal drug enforcement efforts to the detriment of our citizens,” he wrote.

The Los Angeles County sheriff, Lee Baca, who has been one of the leading opponents of the measure, quickly embraced the Justice Department’s stance. He said that the initiative was unconstitutional and vowed to continue enforcing marijuana laws, no matter what voters do in November.

Supporters of the initiative have portrayed support for it as another example in an anti-incumbent year of voters rejecting authority.

“Bring on the establishment,” said Chris Lehane, a senior consultant to the campaign pushing for passage of the initiative. “This campaign, and the energy driving it, is predicated on the common understanding that the establishment’s prohibition approach has been a complete and utter failure, as proven by the point that today it is easier for a kid to get access to pot than it is to buy a beer or a cigarette.”

But Roger Salazar, a political consultant who has been directing the effort to defeat the proposal, said that Mr. Holder’s statement should reinforce deep concerns about the initiative, including the way it was drafted and what he called inflated claims by its backers of what legalization might do.

“This is sort of a shot across the bow from the federal government: They’re saying that, ‘If this thing moves the way we think it is, we’re going to come after you guys,’ ” he said. “That gives California voters one more reason to take a deep breath.”

California’s becoming the first state to legalize marijuana for recreational use would provide a real-life test of theories that proponents of legalization have long pressed: That it would provide a new stream of revenues for government, cut down on drug-related violence and end a modern-day prohibition that effectively turns many citizens into lawbreakers.

As it is, no matter what voters or Mr. Holder do, marijuana use in California these days appears, for all practical purposes, all but legal.

Mr. Schwarzenegger signed legislation last month that made possession of an ounce of marijuana an infraction — it had previously been a misdemeanor — punishable by a $100 fine. Medical marijuana dispensaries are common in many parts of the state, and getting a prescription is hardly challenging. Baby boomers who had not smoked marijuana since college now speak openly at dinner parties of their “medical” experimentation with the drug. The smell of marijuana is hardly unusual at outdoor concerts at places like the Hollywood Bowl.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/16/us/16pot.html?_r=1&src=mv

While I would like to make it clear I don't smoke weed, this is more of the administration's government expansion gone wild. And I do not approve.

Grunthos
10-16-2010, 08:22 PM
One of the many thousands of over-reaches of Constitutional authority the Fed has made under the guise of the Commerce clause, then defended under the Supremacy clause.

People get all emotional about this one because of their personal interests running contrary to the example rather than the principle (they're just pleased as hell when the fed abuses power in ways that suit them); I agree with Orne that the more correct position is to require the fed to butt out of things more properly handled at the state level.

Which is probably more than half of what the Fed currently wastes their time and our money trying and failing to control.

Edmaster
10-17-2010, 05:15 AM
Good luck convincing the feds to give UP control over something.

I agree with G.

Tonus
10-17-2010, 01:22 PM
Interesting, though. Is this an attempt by the administration to "skew moderate"? Conservatives will criticize Obama for trampling state's right and extending government control even further. Liberals will be upset to see such a strict stance being taken against marijuana. It's a strange stance to take from both the political (how does it possibly help?) and ideological angle.

GuitarFreak
10-19-2010, 02:04 AM
Here's another: http://www.alternet.org/drugs/148524/la_sheriff_pledges_to_bust_people_for_pot_even_if_ marijuana_is_legalized_in_california/

LA sheriff said he'll keep busting people for pot even if it's legalized. I hope prop 19 passes. Weed is not bad, and the tax money could really help.

Nyarlathotep
10-20-2010, 03:06 AM
Or, wait for someone in Tennessee to figure a solution:

http://sparkreport.net/2009/03/the-full-story-behind-the-great-tennessee-pot-cave/

Yes, it is old; but, gotta love the ingenuity. Google "pot cave" for more results. :roflmao:

Grunthos
10-22-2010, 12:11 AM
Of course, after all the cartel money stops flowing south and the Mexican economy finishes collapsing, you'll be armpit deep in recent arrivals.

Law of unintended consequences...

MFD
10-22-2010, 04:57 AM
Interesting, though. Is this an attempt by the administration to "skew moderate"? Conservatives will criticize Obama for trampling state's right and extending government control even further. Liberals will be upset to see such a strict stance being taken against marijuana. It's a strange stance to take from both the political (how does it possibly help?) and ideological angle.
This was my initial reaction. There is really nothing to gain for the administration which is currently floundering for support. Are they looking to suddenly appear tough? If so, very poor choice.

Massachusetts recently decriminalized marijuana ($100 fine for <1oz possession) and the wheels are turning on loosening regulation further. It will be interesting to see a battle like this play out on multiple fronts, I honestly wish other states would speed it up so it's not feds vs single state, but of course this might halt some efforts by scaring some legislators.

What bugged me about the SB1070 debate was it came down to People of Arizona vs The Entire US (or thats the way it was framed.) I think that's a poor way for policy to develop, it cheapens the entire process by loading the argument.

Stuffsonic
10-28-2010, 02:02 AM
The Federal government went overboard a long time ago. From what I understand the states were supposed to have the majority of the power anyway.
I really don't know enough about government issues like this, but this really just seems like the Federal government is being too controlling of the states.