Voters in Washington and Colorado recently made American history by becoming the first two states to legalize the recreational use of marijuana for adults over 21.
By so doing, voters believed that they be would freeing up state law enforcement to deal with violent crimes, reallocate precious tax dollars for education and healthcare, collect valuable new tax revenue to boost the money-strapped state economies, and make a lot of people really happy.
This long-awaited, sane and civilized approach to regulating marijuana like alcohol and tobacco is finally coming to fruition, so everyone should be lighting up a spliff and celebrating, right?
Well, just about everyone, except for the grumpy folks on Capital Hill, who aren’t smoking any of those giggly flowers to celebrate, and, in fact, seem dead set on trying to rain on everyone’s parade.
President Obama recently said to ABC news correspondent Barbara Walters, “It would not make sense for us to see a top priority as going after recreational users in states that have determined that it’s legal.”
However, President Obama said pretty much the same thing about medical marijuana patients in California, and then his administration pursued the closure of medical cannabis dispensaries in California more aggressively than any previous presidential administration in U.S. history.
It seems likely that the Obama Administration may try raiding cannabis farmer’s markets in Washington and Colorado, or possibly suing the states themselves, if they try and collect revenue from the sale of cannabis.
Senior federal government officials have stated that they are considering taking legal action to undermine the voter-approved initiatives to legalize the recreational use of marijuana in Washington and Colorado.
According to New York Times reporter Charlie Savage, the federal government is considering several options.
One strategy being considered is to arrest several low-level cannabis users in Colorado and Washington, wait for the defendants to make a motion to dismiss the case because the plant is now legal in the state, and then obtain a court ruling that federal law trumps state law.
Other strategies would include the Justice Department filing lawsuits against Washington and Colorado that would seek to prevent them from setting up systems to regulate and tax cannabis, or to cut off their federal grants, unless they comply with federal marijuana prohibition.
These heavy-handed maneuvers would clearly be a slap in the face to the democratic process, as not only did voters overwhelmingly approve these initiatives, but a recent Gallop poll revealed that the majority of Americans now believe that marijuana prohibition should end, and that the persecuted plant should be regulated like alcohol and tobacco.
If the federal government succeeds in gutting the new state laws, and undermining the democratic process in Washington and Colorado, they will essentially be serving the interests of foreign drug cartels--as, ironically, all this would do is prevent the states from reaping tax benefits.
President Obama told ABC that he doesn’t support broader legalization of marijuana “at this point,” despite the fact that we supposedly live in democracy, the majority of American citizens support legalization, and the scientific evidence confirms that cannabis use doesn’t present any significant threat to pubic health.
The scientific evidence strongly suggests that cannabis not only reduces dangerous stress levels in the body, with few, if any, negative side-effects, but that it may help to significantly reduce the risk of cancer and brain damage.
“What we’re going to need to have is a conversation about this,” President Obama said.
A conversation? This response sounds a little like “we still need more research,” which the U.S. government has been saying now for years about medical marijuana, despite abundant research that’s overflowing with evidence for its many medical benefits and safety.
Ironically, many of these studies emerged internationally, as--despite the U.S. federal government’s repeated calls for more research, they have, in fact, made deliberate attempts attempt to block any marijuana studies that don’t demonstrate negative effects, by maintaining a monopoly on the supply of research cannabis in the U.S.
President Obama said that the question is “how do you reconcile a federal law that still says marijuana is a federal offense and state laws that say that it’s legal?”
That doesn’t sound like a very tough question to me, if we lived in democracy, and respected state rights.
However, I realize that President Obama has a lot of campaign supporters that have publicly expressed their attempts to criminalize cannabis users--the alcohol industry, the prison-industrial complex, and the pharmaceutical industry--so I sympathize with his position.
President Obama, this is my heartfelt plea to you.
You were once a committed cannabis smoker yourself, and it didn’t harm you. You became president of the United States.
Many young African Americans get caught up in the criminal-justice system, because of their use of cannabis, and are not so lucky. These people deserve a chance to live the American dream, just like you.
Please, for the good of the American people, end the injustice and legalize cannabis today.
You have the power to end marijuana prohibition under the Controlled Substances Act. You can do it today, if you believed in heading to the democratic will of the people, with a single executive order.
To learn more about about cannabis legalization see:
If you enjoy my column, and want to learn more about psychedelic and cannabis culture, “like” my Facebook page:
www.facebook.com/pages/David-Jay-Brown/115740098445882?ref=ts
and follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/DavidJayBrown
We do not live in a democracy in the United States, we live in a representative republic, in which federal law supersedes state law. We cannot judge the government we have by the government we wish we had. In order for drug use to be made legal, it must be legalized at the federal level. That takes work nationally, and lots of money. There are many moneyed interests opposed to the legalization of marijuana. This is the political reality.
Alcohol prohibition was lifted at state levels first too. Stop saying WA & CO are the first states to LEGALIZE cannabis. Its not true! They're the first states to lift their state prohibition & RE-Legalize Cannabis. Representative Republic is a type of democracy!!! We live in a democracy! Stop this republic stuff! Thats just the type of democracy government we have here in the USA.
We do not live in a representative republic where the tyranny of the majority always has will. We live in Constitutional Republic where certain rights are NOT to be violated by the federal government. The 9th Amendment: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." The 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." And so, Michael, WHERE does the Constitution authorize the federal government to take an interest in domestic drug use? Clearly, the federal laws against marijuana are ILLEGAL under the word and spirit of our Constitution. Such laws violate the 9th and 10th Amendments. Only STATES can pass laws against drugs. If you care about our Constitution. But there are those who care far more about controlling the private lives of other people And it is those people who tend to be supporters of the federal drug laws. Constitution be damned, right?
This is an opportunity for conservatives, who uphold that the majority of votes in a state should become law and oppose the Obama administration's attempts to impose federal law, to support these states. Mainstream medical opinion states that marijuana poses no more medical danger to health and addiction than alcohol or tobacco. Sugar poses a greater risk to health than marijuana yet it is advertised and sold to children in the form of sodas, junk foods and cereals. The social-economic benefits of decriminalizing cannabis far outweigh any negative medical effects to society "... freeing up state law enforcement to deal with violent crimes, reallocate precious tax dollars for education and healthcare, collect valuable new tax revenue to boost the money-strapped state economies ..." are among its many benefits. It takes big profits out of selling marijuana making it far less attractive to criminal elements thus reducing overall crime and murders. Law enforcement, criminal justice and prisons would be far less overburdened. Its production and cultivation would be well regulated to have minimal impact upon health and the environment. The financial benefits of decriminalizing marijuana cannot be understated. It can be taxed like alcohol and tobacco to bring in significant revenues and will greatly relieve the financial burdens of law enforcement, criminal justice and prison systems as. So why is marijuana illegal?
We are free to interpret and revise the Constitution as contemporary events demand.
Different is not the same.
In order to reverse that decision, representatives to the federal government must be convinced that it is in the greater good of the citizens of the United States to be able to grow and purchase marijuana legally.
237 years ago... Well guns in schools were not recognized as a problem either. There are varing forms of democracy, monarchs, & despots, etc... Please stop acting like USA does not exercise a form of democracy. Check out the definitions in a political science book. I did to educate myself on some terms, like 'cash whipping' & 'wage slave'. Truthfully, we live in a plutocracy! And its a shame!
If everything must be approved by big brother, why have states? Build momentum? Do anything? We must build and leverage unity to forxe the will of the people. We must educate the masses. We are the government.
We cannot force the will of the people, since the people, all of the people, have no single will. We are not the government. We are the citizens. The government works for us.
Take the government out of the equation. It does not belong. I spent 5 years in Federal Prison for a marijuana offense. I wrote about the great times I had before my arrest. Following a fiasco with the IRS, I became a dealer of ounces, then pounds, then multi-tons. Later, I became an importer. I and my friends were living free and harming no one. My book: Shoulda Robbed a Bank I would be honored by your review.
Who participates in 'the government'? Who is elected? Why do women vote? Civil Rights? It comes from the people. Please look up forms of democracy. I'm not arguing with you over our form (republic). I saying it is a form of democracy. Here's one search finding: http://www.democracy-building.info/systems-democracy.html
If not does it make sense to treat it as if it did? If it doesn't make sense then what is the argument for still treating it as if it did? Laws need to have a basis in truth or reason or they are irreverent and needless. Doesn't this make sense?
The issue is whether marijuana should be treated by the fed like alcohol and tobacco in states where it is now legal. Just because one feels that it should be legal does not give license for one to traffic or use it.while it is still illegal. If you break the law you must face the music.
Especially in his second term, I deem it likely that his position on legalizing marijuana is capable of "evolving", as he did with same-sex marriage. But the guy has to pick his fights, and we the people have not yet convinced Washington that we WANT this. We need to keep up the grass-roots activism, at the local and State level. Sooner or later, the politicians will notice the shift in the wind. Let's make it SOONER!
We are still in the midst of an economic crisis. Decriminalizing marijuana will enable federal and state agencies to better focus resources upon social-economic issues instead of criminal marijuana issues.
Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution does it say that the government is allowed to protect us from harming ourselves, assuming that this is the genuine motivation behind cannabis prohibition (although I highly suspect otherwise). Our representatives have criminalized cannabis use through an interpretation of the intestate commerce laws, which were never intended for such a thing. Our Supreme Court determined that the Marijuana Tax Act was unconstitutional in 1968, so Richard Nixon tried to find a way to arrest antiwar protesters, and thus created The Controlled Substances Act. This is not an amendment to the Constitution, as alcohol prohibition was, but rather a bizarre interpretation of interstate commerce laws, and it has become a way to create a huge slave labor pool by arresting poor minorities.
Interesting idea, a true democracy by computers. I would like to see how people can "demonstrating that they have educated themselves on the issue, by passing a brief test." Even lawyers, legislators and Supreme Court justices have difficulty understanding and interpreting many laws. How are the masses going to understand them? I'm sure such a proposal will be extremely unpopular among our legislators. They would all have to find real jobs.