Posted July 28, 2003
Analysis by Richard Cowan

Last
week, the prohibitionists had a bit of a scare. With George (Top Gun) Bush
looking vulnerable, most of the candidates for the 2004 Democratic Presidential
nomination seemed to be indicating support for medical marijuana.

Of more
immediate concern, a bill in support of medical marijuana which no one expected
to pass, was defeated 273 to 152, but it still did much better than expected.
The bill would simply have prohibited the DEA from spending money to interfere
with state medical marijuana laws, but the prohibitionists acted as though it
were going to make marijuana mandatory.

The NORML
report below gives the full details and a link to a transcript of the debate.
(Warning: Do not read without access to a powerful anti-emetic!)

However,
the debate did bring to the surface a few interesting additions to the
prohibitionist party line, and a demonstration of how the Drug War, and
especially the war on cannabis really works.
See
Science,
Democracy, Ideology and the Prohibitionist Police State. Marijuana Use Doesn’t
Hurt “Thinking Skills” But Prohibition Does. Analysis by Richard Cowan

Mark Souder, a Congressman from Indiana, who thinks he
is a “conservative,” but really represents the narcocracy, chairs the Subcommittee
on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources, Committee on Government
Reform. He is also the father of the smoke-a-joint-lose-your-student-loan bill.
See
Smoke-A-Joint-And-Lose-Your-Student-Loan:
Will This Move the Campuses?
An Excellent Overview

Two
letters addressed to him were read into the record.
Three points:
1. The police lead the opposition, and there are “more
than 308,000 members of the Fraternal Order of Police.”

2. More frightening, there are “60,000
state and local law enforcement officers in 40 states who are members of the
NNOAC – National Narcotic Officers’ Associations Coalition.” What
is the real danger to America?

3.
There are two charming new additions to the party line:
“Marijuana is sometimes traded for precursor chemicals
for methamphetamines…”
and “in the State of Washington,
which is a significant gateway for
high-potency marijuana that can sell
for the same price as heroin on many of
our nation’s streets.”

This
echoes the old line about BC Bud being “traded pound for pound for cocaine.”
That dates back to at least 1998.
See
Now
USA Today Is Parroting The DEA Line That Canadian Marijuana
Is Swapped “Pound For Pound For Cocaine”

Of course, if this were true, it would be an argument against cannabis
prohibition.

What
this debate really proves is that the narks drive cannabis prohibition, but they
are slowly losing their hold on the Congress, and – once again – there is no
lie that they will not tell, or that “useful idiots” – Lenin’s phrase
– like Souder will not parrot.

Below
is the full text of the police and nark letters, and then the NORML report with
links to supporting materials.

From
the Fraternal Order of Police

:
To the Hon. MARK SOUDER,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources,
Committee on Government Reform
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN:
I am writing to advise you of the strong opposition of the membership of the
Fraternal Order of Police to an amendment to be offered today by Representative
Maurice D. Hinchey to H.R. 2799, the appropriations measure for the Department
of Commerce, Justice, State and the Judiciary, which would effectively prohibit
enforcement of Federal law with respect to marijuana in States that do not
provide penalties for the use of the drug for so-called “medical”
reasons. In these States, Federal enforcement is the only effective enforcement
of the laws prohibiting the possession and use of marijuana.
(MarijuanaNews note: Federal arrests are less than 2%
of all marijuana possession charges.)

Federal
efforts provide the sole deterrent to the use of harder drugs and the commission
of other crimes, including violent crimes and crimes against property, which go
hand-in-hand with drug use and drug trafficking organizations, particularly in
the State of California where marijuana is sometimes traded for precursor
chemicals for methamphetamines, and in the State of Washington, which is a
significant gateway for high-potency marijuana that can sell for the same price
as heroin on many of our nation’s streets.

The
Hinchey amendment threatens to cause a significant disruptive effect on the
combined efforts of State and local law enforcement to reduce drug crime in
every region of the country. On behalf of the more than
308,000 members of the Fraternal Order of Police, we urge its defeat. If
I can be of any further help on this issue, please feel free to contact me or
Executive Director Jim Pasco through my Washington office.
Sincerely,
Chuck Canterbury,
National President. –

From
The National Narcotic Officers’ Associations Coalition
West Covina, CA,
July 22, 2003.
To the Hon. MARK SOUDER,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug
Policy, and Human Resources, Committee on Government Reform,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.

DEAR CHAIRMAN SOUDER:
I am writing to let you know of the strong opposition of the 60,000 state and
local law enforcement officers in 40 states who are members of the NNOAC
to an amendment to be offered today to the Commerce/Justice/State Appropriations
bill that would effectively prohibit enforcement of federal marijuana law in
states that do not provide penalties for the use
of so-called “medical” marijuana.

Because even a modest amount of federal marijuana
enforcement is now the only effective enforcement of the marijuana laws in
several such states, it provides a strong deterrent effect to the use of harder
drugs and other crimes, including violent crimes and crimes against property.
(MarijuanaNews note: Notice the repetition. When a lie is repeated it is the
party line.)

Federal
investigations of marijuana producers also serve to disrupt larger drug
trafficking organizations, particularly in the State of California where
marijuana
is sometimes traded for precursor chemicals for methamphetamines,
and in the State of Washington, which
is a significant gateway for
high-potency marijuana that can sell
for the same price as heroin.

The Hinchey amendment threatens to
cause a significant disruptive effect on state and local law enforcement of both
drug laws and of other crimes affecting public safety in states where it would
apply. We strongly encourage Members of Congress who support their local police
officers andlaw enforcement to oppose this amendment.
Sincerely,
Ronald E. Brooks, President.

From NORML

Historic House Vote
More Than 150 Members Of Congress Stand Up For The Medical Use Of Marijuana

July
24, 2003 - Washington, DC, USA

“The federal government should use its
power to help terminally ill citizens, not arrest them!”

Washington, DC: Fifteen Republicans joined a record 136 Democrats
(and one Independent) on Wednesday to vote
in favor of a bi-partisan amendment to the House Commerce, Justice, State,
and the Judiciary Appropriations bill that sought to bar the Justice Department
from prosecuting patients who use medical marijuana in compliance with state
laws. Although the amendment was eventually defeated by a 273
to 152 vote, the number of Congressmen on record in support of the
physician-supervised use of medicinal marijuana was the largest ever recorded in
Congress.

“This vote represents real progress in our
efforts to amend federal law to permit the medicinal use of marijuana,”
NORML Executive Director Keith Stroup said, noting that fewer than 100 members
of Congress supported the use of medical pot when the issue was last voted
on in 1998. “Most promising is that more than two-thirds of House
Democrats supported this amendment. Our next priority is to get these same
members to sign on as co-sponsors of House Bill 2233, the States’
Rights to Medical Marijuana Act, and mandate Congress to schedule
legislative hearings on this vital legislation.”

The proposed amendment - introduced by Reps. Maurice
Hinchey (D-NY) and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) - would have prevented federal law
enforcement from “arresting, prosecuting, suing, or otherwise discouraging
doctors, patients, and distributors … from following their state laws with
regard to medical marijuana.”

Since 2001, the Bush administration has ordered more
than 40 federal raids of medicinal marijuana patients and providers in
California, despite a state law permitting the use and cultivation of pot by
qualified patients. (Similar laws eliminating criminal penalties on the use of
medicinal marijuana have been enacted in eight other states.) The administration
is also asking the Supreme
Court to overturn a unanimous Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling
upholding the rights of physicians to discuss the medical use of marijuana with
their patients.

Representatives Hinchey and Rohrabacher - along with
Reps. Sam Farr (D-CA), Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Dennis Kucinich (D-OH),
Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Ron Paul (R-TX) and Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) - spoke in favor
of the amendment, noting that the provision supported “states’ rights”
and “reaffirm[ed] the power of citizen democracy and state and local
government.”

“This is about compassion,” said Dennis
Kucinich, one of nine Democrat candidates for President. “The federal
government should use its power to help terminally ill citizens, not arrest
them. And states deserve to have the right to make their own decisions regarding
the use of medical marijuana.”

Representative Rohrabacher argued that the federal
government’s interference with states’ medical marijuana policies “is
totally contrary to our way of life. It is a travesty for the federal government
to send police into my state (California) and arrest people and throw them in a
cage, in jail, for doing something that the vast majority of people … voted to
make a legal practice.”

Rohrabacher said that his mother could have likely
benefited from the medical use of marijuana as an appetite stimulant shortly
before her death, and that he “could not look at [himself] in the
face” if he backed the administration’s position outlawing the drug’s use.

Representatives Michael Burgess (R-TX), John Shadegg
(R-AZ), Mark Souder (R-IN) and Frank Wolf (R-VA) spoke out against the
amendment, maintaining that “state medical marijuana laws are a sham,”
and that the use of marijuana as a medicine “has taken the culture in the
wrong direction.”

For more information, please contact Keith
Stroup of NORML at (202) 483-5500. A transcript of the House debate is
available online at:
http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/HincheyAmendmentTrans2003.pdf

A breakdown of the House vote is available
from NORML’s website at:
http://capwiz.com/norml2/home/

Share This Post

You Should Also Check Out These Posts:

Most Active Posts: