End the Federal Government’s War Against Medical Marijuana
I recently took the time to write a letter to my US Congressman and Senators asking them to support the Hinchey-Rohrbacher Medical Marijuana amendment that is expected to come up for a vote tomorrow. For those of you who would like to see the federal government stop prosecuting medical marijuana patients, Downsize DC has started a letter writing campaign.
Here is the letter I wrote:
The Honorable [name withheld for purposes of anonymity]
Thank you for taking the time to read my letter.
I am writing to you to voice my support for the Hinchey-Rohrbacher amendment in hopes that you will thoughtfully consider my argument in favor of this piece of legislation and also support it.
This amendment, as I understand it, would prohibit funds for the Department of Justice from being used to prevent patients in states that have medical marijuana laws from following those laws.
This piece of legislation is not about whether marijuana should be first line treatment for people suffering from terminal illnesses. Nor is it about congress endorsing marijuana use. It’s about injecting a level of sanity and compassion into our federal drug laws that have sadly been lacking for more than three decades.
It’s also about federalism, a principle upon which our country was founded on. Nowhere in the Constitution is the government granted the power to prohibit the use or possession of marijuana or any other intoxicant. Congress essentially acknowledged this argument during the 1910′s when it passed alcohol prohibition only AFTER members of the US House and Senate and a majority of the state legislatures passed a Constitutional amendment making it legal for the federal government to prohibit the “manufacture, sale, or possession” of alcohol. To this date, no similar Constitutional amendment has been passed with regards to marijuana.
Over the last twelve years, ten states have adopted laws which allow the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. They legalized the use of marijuana to relieve the intense pain that accompanies debilitating diseases, including AIDS, cancer, multiple sclerosis, and glaucoma. With the exceptions of Hawaii and Vermont, all of those laws were adopted by referendum, passed by the people.
Our federal drug laws are draconian in the manner in which they punish non-violent people, and their effectiveness has proven to be questionable at best. We’re told that in a democracy, if you don’t agree with a law, you have the option of changing the law through the democratic means rather than simply breaking the law. Yet Americans in several states have turned to the democratic process and voted in favor of giving people the right to use medical marijuana, only to watch the federal government negate their vote and send the DEA to arrest and prosecute peaceful medical marijuana users in states in which medical marijuana use is legal.
I feel that this is wrong and that a more sensible drug policy is needed–one that upholds the Constitution and our most basic of civil liberties.
Please vote in favor of the Hinchey-Rohrbacher amendment, or at the very least, do your part to see to it that congress has an open and honest debate over this piece of legislation.
Sincerely,
Nick Rivera
8 Responses to “End the Federal Government’s War Against Medical Marijuana”
I believe that there are two problems due to drugs: health risks and associated crime. Health risks will always be a problem whether drugs are legal or illegal, but at least if drugs were legalized the government could offer some assurance of quality, and that would help to limit overdoses. The crime problem associated with drugs could be mostly eliminated through legalization – when drugs are available inside the local corner store no one has to be shot over a turf war, and the resulting profits would leave the hands of gangs and go instead to businesses.
The arguments against legalization seem to boil down to “drugs are bad” and “we don’t want to make it easier for kids to get them”. However, alcohol, cigarettes, guns, and other legal items are also “bad”, and kids are going to get drugs whether they’re legal or not, so those arguments may not carry much weight. Legalizing drugs would help reduce crime, provide a new revenue stream in the form of taxes, and allow some quality assurance. It may not be a perfect option, but it strikes me as the lesser of two evils.
That said, in today’s climate any politician probably couldn’t propose legalization without paying a cost, but it might be possible to change the law to make this a state issue. Nevada (which has already legalized gambling and prostitution) would likely lead the charge towards drug legalization, and other states could then look to their model to determine a future direction.
Thank you for this most important post. There may be no greater hypocrisy than the government’s tactic endorsement of a dizzying variety of licit drugs that are abused by millions of Americans and its ongoing draconian prosecution of pot smokers and refusal to sanction the use of medical marijuana.
Hear, hear!
Let’s all smoke a doobie in honor of this great article.
This amendment has no chance. Todays political environment is still quite conservative. The “War on Drugs” and “War on Crime” became a conservative rallying cry. To challenge these wars means you support the enemy. I hear rumblings that Republicans may use these issues to deflect from Iraq. Being tough on crime/drugs is like supporting babies and puppies.
The war is on legal drugs. Prescription drugs, alcohol and tobacco kill more people than the organic drugs. Why not a war on steroids, Xanax and Valium.
Rather ironic considering how many conservatives believe the question of abortion should be left up to the individual states.
Medical Ganja? Not so much..
Prohibiting pot while you allow alcohol and tobacco (the last far more addictive and lethal than pot) is pure hypocrisy, but it’s also expensive and ineffectual.
The quantity of money that goes into fighting against marijuana is monstrous. Just the money spent to incarcerate a host of non-violent offenders who will enter mild criminals and leave hardened ones is insane. With that money you could afford to help, oh I don’t know, TREAT all the cancers medical marijuana is supposed to help with. In addition, not allowing for legal marijuana cuts the government out of what would be staggering quantities in terms of taxes.
In addition to moral grand-standing against something almost no one REALLY thinks is that bad (when was the last time someone under 80 gasped in horror knowing that you once smoked pot?) I see something more sinister. Mafias love that pot’s illegal, keeps the business brutal and therefore not as competitive, they don’t pay taxes or have to follow any rules, and prices stay high. And they have money, lots and lots of it. And what language do politicians speak?
You can thank the values voters. The evangelistas still froth at the mouth when they think of free love, gay marriage, and flag-burning, pot-smoking hippies. They are convinced that only tough eradication of what’s left of the counterculture will save the sanctity of marriage and Christian family values.
Medical marijuana may have a lot of value to chronic pain sufferers, but I don’t expect it to be legalized in my lifetime. Unless we elect someone like Kinky Friedman for POTUS, lol.
Better put your water-pipes away. Wednesday’s medical marijuana amendment was
defeated in U.S. House by a vote of 262 to 165.